Luke 2:36 - 38; Luke 7:11 - 16; Luke 18:1 - 8; Luke 21:1 - 4

I have in mind, dear brethren, to speak about widows as they are viewed in this gospel. They have a unique place in this gospel, and these four of whom I have read include all the widows spoken of in the sense of being examples, or as representing features of the truth. The Lord indeed alludes to a widow of whom I have not read, but not to one in current history then, but in past history -- the widow of Sarepta -- and His allusion shows that widowhood in itself need not be representative of what is of God, for He says, "There were many widows in Israel in the days of Elias ... and to none of them was Elias sent but to Sarepta", Luke 4:26 -- that is outside the limits of Israel. He says, he was sent "to a woman that was a widow". She was singled out and honoured of God, but, as I said, she was not in current history and those of whom I have read were in current history. The Lord so regards them and they represent or include all the widows in current history at the time; such, I mean, as are used to illustrate the truth, and in what I have to say tonight, dear brethren, I am not intending at all to occupy you with past history merely, but with current history. There are those indeed who carry on what they regard as the service of the Lord and deal in past events and future events, but what the Spirit has to say to the churches at any given time alludes to what is current. Indeed, one has often remarked, and it is well to observe it, Scripture always speaks to the person who reads it -- it has him in mind -- or to the persons who may hear him read it. And so it is tonight as I have read these scriptures, they speak to me, and they speak to you, to all of us, so that we might learn something of

widowhood and whether we are in it in any sense -- in any of those four senses spoken of in these scriptures.

Luke has in mind the women he presents to help us in regard to the assembly, more particularly its public aspect. John also has in mind to help us as to the assembly, but more as to its spiritual or inward aspect. Matthew, too, has the assembly in his mind in his gospel, but in its administrative capacity. Luke would occupy us with seemliness in our public relations, and ornamentation, too. These four scriptures afford considerable instruction as to the public position of the saints as moving or walking in relation to the assembly, as of it. What you get, dear brethren, in the first instance, is a very old widow. The book indeed occupies us at the outset with old persons, but concurrently with young persons and in the public history of the assembly, these two features always appear. One generation comes and passes away, as we are told, and another comes, but the coming one is concurrent to a point with the one passing away, and the function of the one passing away is, in a great measure, to carry forward substantially and in an exemplary way what existed in the immediate past, so that there is a consecutive history in the assembly -- the passing-away generation furnishing the coming one and so on, and hence the importance of old brothers and sisters maintaining freshness in their outlook and conversation, not occupying us unduly with their earlier days, although it is well to keep the earlier days in mind, and what they learnt from the generation that was passing away as they came in; but then also what they are themselves, for we are not historians, whether oral or in the sense of writing. A mere historian in Christianity is a bore and answerable to nobody, whereas one who is in the enjoyment of the things he has in his mind and who has added to them, not anything extremist, but what is in keeping with them, is a help; he can

be listened to. He passes away in triumph and leaves something in the way of example as well as in the way of instruction and information with the coming generation. In Luke this is exactly how he presents the truth. He introduces to us two old people. No doubt, if one were enquiring as to the brethren in this city one would enquire about the older ones, and it is well to enquire, too. There are those who stretch back a long way and have had something to do, perhaps, with the recovery of the truth in this city. So Luke would just present to you that sort of thing. He introduces to us two old people -- exemplary people, too, outwardly. You could not find anything to complain of as to their way of doing, their movements and services. Indeed Zacharias is serving in the order of his priesthood, so that the casual eye would see nothing but what was right. Elizabeth, too, is highly commended, but we are immediately told that they were accustomed to pray for things which they did not expect to get. That is a very poor thing in old brothers and sisters, and indeed, so serious is it in the mind of heaven that the brother, the responsible person, Zacharias, is stricken with dumbness for a period. Elizabeth holds her ground and joins in with the work of God, the fresh work of God that was coming in Mary. She joins with that most happily. It is a very beautiful thing to see the older ones joining in with a fresh movement, for God delights in freshness and takes up young people, seemly people, suitable people, prepared people, in order to inaugurate something fresh; and how beautiful it is when the older ones join in that, are thoroughly in it -- and that is what you get in Elizabeth. She and Mary had a delightful time in the hill country of Judaea. Zacharias had to wait for nine months or so -- a very poor time he must have had in his dumbness. He could say nothing. It was judicial, and we must not assume that although

grace is reigning God is not acting judicially, because He is acting judicially. And so Zacharias has to suffer, but then he suffered profitably, for as soon as his tongue is loosed he praises God. They are his best days; he is entirely free from all personal and natural feelings, because instead of speaking of his son, glorifying his son, he glorifies Christ, that is, he has Christ in mind -- the dayspring -- this fresh glorious thought is in his mind.

Then in chapter 2 we have two old people, that is, Simeon and Anna. I am speaking, of course, about widows, and I proceed to speak about Anna. She is said to be a very old person and that is what I have in mind in referring to her first in the midst of young people, in the midst of a great movement of God, the introduction of Jesus here on earth, a babe in the temple. Well, she is of great age, we are told, but she is thoroughly in the thing. It would perhaps be questionable in some of your minds to say she was a very, very old person, but actually she must have been more than one hundred, for I take it that she was actually in widowhood for eighty-four years. But how honourably and how beautifully she is mentioned in her earlier days. She lived with her husband for seven years. There is not a flaw, beloved friends, as far as the Spirit of God is concerned, in this person. She is of great age, knowing widowhood as perhaps no one in her times knew it, but she is completely above her circumstances. She is energetic. I need not enlarge on her because she is known so well amongst us, thank God. I am speaking of her now for one purpose. I am speaking to the older ones to begin with here. How she carried down -- how far back she must have gone. I believe the intent is to the spiritual mind that she carried down conditions depicted in Malachi to conditions in this great intervention of God, that is, the old dispensation in all that it was, spiritually, is embodied

in this wonderful widow, showing that there was no hiatus, as it were, in the testimony of God. It was carried down in quality from the one dispensation to the other. Correspondingly in any communication of God in any city or country in the world, any fresh energy of the Spirit, there is no thought whatever of disregarding what preceded it. Whatever is of God is to be accumulated and carried down, not only by historic means, but in a substantial way by those who might otherwise be overwhelmed with their circumstances, that is Anna. She is in the temple night and day, as we are told, and she came in at that instant when Simeon was speaking so beautifully, so prophetically, of Jesus. She came in at that instant. She came in at the right moment. Here are two people who are thoroughly at one in regard of Christ, in regard of this new great intervention of God. They are thoroughly at one and she in a way exceeding Simeon in activities and in priestly feelings. She spoke of Jesus. She spoke of the Lord to all those who looked for redemption in Jerusalem; that is to say, with her there would be no question of occupying the disinterested ones. It is a question of the interested ones. There are interested ones today. It is delightful in moving about the world to see the interested ones, the interest in their faces and feelings, in their demeanour, in their attitude towards the truth. She is engaged with interested ones, and she is engaged with them energetically, night and day in the temple, maintaining relations with God in His temple. She spoke to all those who looked for redemption in Jerusalem, and that is all I had to say about her.

Now I pass on to the second scripture -- a very different picture, still a widow; and Luke records the Lord Jesus as having to say to her, not she to Him, as in Anna's case. The Lord is still a babe in Anna's day, but now He is in active service and He is having

to say to her, and although this is a beautiful gospel text, I am not speaking of it from that point of view, but as bringing in the widow features as applying to us at any given time. I would be very simple and pointed, and you will bear with me in any remarks that may perhaps cut against our feelings. Her position is favourable -- it is naturally favourable. I would say, dear brethren, that that is a dangerous thing for Christians, not that we are not to enjoy things. God gives us all things richly to enjoy. The ungodly unconverted enjoy them but not as we enjoy them. Rain comes down on them and the sun shines on them, but there is no giving of thanks with them. There is no return to God; they are sinning against heaven, in that sense, in God's sight, as the prodigal did. But, dear brethren, Christians may be in very comfortable circumstances, the prospect pleases, everything is just what might be desired. I have no doubt that the common idea of Nain is that it was favourable. It was set in a good prospect. Although this was a widow, she was set in a good prospect. It was evidently a pleasing place. That is a dangerous state of things amongst the people of God. I do not say that it is illegitimate, not at all, for God prospers us as our souls prosper, and there are those He can trust these material things to; but then He says, if you are not faithful with these things you are not going to be entrusted with greater things than these; that is obvious, and the danger is that we have a nice meeting, a nice business, a nice house and car. I am not speaking against these things themselves, but to bring out what may exist. There is a serpent in it, and it has to be watched. God allows it to go on. This disaster occurred in the woman's house. This boy was probably the delight of her heart. He was an only son. How delightful an only son is; how a widowed heart would cherish an only son; her only hope in all this prospect around

in which he might one day shine. We may bring up our children and educate them, and all that goes with it, in order that they may shine in this prospect. God loves us too well to allow this. The boy dies. The widow's heart is robbed of its object, but God intends that that heart is to be filled with a restored son. He was the only son, we are told, of his mother and she was a widow. Now he is to be restored. We are told that there were a good many with her at the funeral. She was a person in favour, and that is quite possible with brethren -- to be in good favour. I do not say that it should not be, but the more we accept the reproach of Christ, the less we will be in favour. It is said of the Lord that He grew in favour with God and with men, and quite right to a point, and quite wrong beyond that. The more we accept the reproach of Christ the less we will be in favour. She had a large funeral apparently, but then the Lord is on the other course. He has a good many with Him; He has the disciples with Him. Thank God for the many Christians there are today. Let nobody be afraid of numbers -- of numbers of true disciples. There were a good many with the Lord. He loves to have His disciples with Him, He looks for it, especially as He is moving along in the testimony, as it is here. He touched the bier and says, "Young man, I say unto thee, Arise". If there is any young man or young woman here who has been brought up with worldly prospects in any sense, in any legitimate sense, it is for you to pay attention, for this young man died. It might have been said that there was not a young man in Nain that could be spared less than this young man. He was taken. The Lord knows where to strike. He knows where to strike in love, where to touch us, and then it is to give us back infinitely more than we had expected, and how different now is the prospect! The young man, we are told, "sat up, and began to speak". Think of what

might be read into this. If we look at it spiritually this young man is back from the dead. What would he speak about? Normally, what would he speak of? What would anybody ask him about? If I were to see him I would ask him something about his experience. He began to speak. The idea is that the thing is begun. Something that was needed is begun, and he is now given back to his mother. What a conversation they would have, dear brethren, as the pall-bearers and the funeral people dispersed, and as they were alone, what a conversation they would have! What speaking! A young man come back from the dead, and is that not what is needed? It is not oratory that we can learn in the schools and colleges, it is learning how to speak according to God. Zacharias began to speak after he was dumb. This young man was dead and he began to speak, after he was dead, now that he was risen. That is the sort of speaking, that is the speaking that enriches the saints -- the assembly: the speaking of one who has had this experience; and so the testimony is greatly enhanced, because it is said that God has visited His people. All these happenings -- if God comes into a family in this way, that has been looking towards the earth or the world, converts young people, touches them as to their baptism, enables them to take the ground of their baptism, take the ground of their being risen with Christ, and to speak accordingly, what is the effect? Something has happened. A great prophet has risen up. The testimony is to Christ and to God -- that God has visited His people. Is it not worth while? That is how the testimony goes on. It is in these visitations of God, a present application is seen in the speaking of life, the speaking that marks one who has been in death and come out of it in the power of the Spirit.

I come on to speak of the third widow, chapter 18. Here we have still a different view. It is no longer a

bright prospect. It is a city sure enough, but it is no longer Nain. The saints viewed in this light are in great distress, and the more spiritual we are, the more apart from the world we are, the more we feel these things. The adversary -- this woman had an adversary. The more we are with God in widow state in this sense, the more we shall feel it. It is keenly felt. How is this to be met? Last week we had a bright week; things were bright and cheerful amongst us. This week something has happened -- the adversary has got in. How quickly things of this kind come up. The souls of the saints are wrung with distress. They are baffled. How can it be met? There is no man to help us. It is a widow, bereft of her husband. God tests us in this way. Gloom is apt to settle down upon us and I might say surrender, but not with this widow. See what she had to contend with. Here is a judge who does not care about God or about man. The circumstances are most difficult, but the Lord says they are intended to be that. They are intended to be difficult. The case of the widow of Nain was intended, and this case was intended to bring out the latent power of faith in the saints. If we are Christians at all God has put us in these circumstances to bring out the latent sensibilities and instincts that we have and we are resolved that there can be no abandonment of the position. The way out is prayer. "Men ought always to pray", as the Lord says, "Always to pray and not to faint", Luke 18:1. We can see how practical this is, and how unless we take it home we shall be overwhelmed. Some will give up; some will turn aside; some will say, 'I cannot go to that unjust man, I cannot persevere in that'. But the Lord is picturing difficult circumstances, and He is directing your heart, not to a difficult ungodly man, but to God, for we pray to God, not to unjust judges. God would keep us away from them as regards actual judges, but the Lord is picturing a difficult case and

He is showing that faith triumphs in spite of difficulties. "Men ought always to pray and not to faint". If we look back at our histories, we shall readily discern these very circumstances having marked us time and time again, and how did we get out of it? We got out of it in this way, as we persevered in prayer. God will not fail. He bears long with the persons who are praying. They are not trying Him. He bears long as to them. We have to learn the patience of God; God is bearing long with the adversary. As to us, He is keeping His eye on us. He has great patience as to the adversary. He hopes that it may be that he will deliver himself from the snare of the devil, and God is working out His own thoughts in our souls all the while. Here it is a question of God's elect. If one were to take up the thought of the elect, how much could be said about it. It is a question of God's sovereign election of us in these circumstances. He has elected us in these circumstances. They are as much a part of His election as the other, because He brings out the latent power there is through His own work in His elect. The Lord says, to use the figure, He will indeed avenge His own elect, although He bears long as to them. Let us not thwart the purpose of God in being impatient in circumstances. God has long patience in regard to the adversary, but He has His eye on us, and the thing will come to an end. As the parable shows, the unjust judge grants the petition because of the perseverance in prayer.

Finally, in chapter 21, we have the well-known instance of the widow who gave two mites. She has a fitting place. She is on a level with Anna; she is a sister of Anna -- a spiritual woman, and the Spirit of God brings her in here. The Lord having not to say to her, but to us of her. It is one thing to have the Lord speak to you. He loves to do it, too, but it is another thing to have Him speak of you. It is one

of the most interesting things to hear what divine Persons say of the saints. I believe that very largely the conversation in heaven is in regard of the saints. We can understand it, in a way prove it, in the way that the more spiritual we are as brethren, the more our conversations would be about the saints -- I mean the saints in relation to God, in relation to Christ as the inheritance of God. What spiritual people do, what marks them down here, reflects what is in heaven, and I have not a doubt, I have not any hesitation in saying that the theme of holy conversation up there has to do with the saints. Think of our being the subject of conversation up there. One could prove it from many scriptures, how the saints are the theme up there. Divine persons speak to one another, of each other to each other, but they do love to speak of the saints. The Lord is interceding, we are told. "... he ever liveth to make intercession". That means that He is speaking about the saints from that point of view constantly. How sorrowful if He has to speak of our naughtiness. He intercedes -- He ever liveth to intercede for us. He is now speaking of this woman. He was watching at the treasury of God and she came there and cast in all her living. Scripture does not say, He knew everything divinely. There cannot be a doubt that He knew everything divinely, that He knew in detail exactly what that woman had. He knew much more about her than the Spirit of God tells us here. He was watching. He was looking on as to what was happening, and this woman came and cast in all her living into the treasury of God. That is a beautiful view of the saints, if indeed we can be so regarded in a concrete way. All her living. But then what a living! What must have entered into that living! The actual mites, the actual coins, are deposited in the treasury of God. What does it mean, dear friends? It means simply that the saints have turned around completely from mere prosperity in

this world. They have turned around completely and all that they have is now in relation to the treasury of God. It is a question of promoting what is of God in this world. What a spectacle for heaven is that! Everyone who acts like this woman becomes the peculiar theme of conversation in heaven. There is no unjust judge here. There is no one persecuting here. It is the saints turning around entirely from mere selfishness and being occupied with gain in this world, to use what they have under their hand in relation to the testimony of God. That is the final widow in this book, and what a finish!

So the Lord goes on to speak immediately (circumstances brought it up) of the temple that was then there made of stones. He says, "... there shall not be left one stone upon another", Luke 21:6. What did he have in His mind? Do you think He had forgotten this woman? He had carried her forward in His mind. Suppose there is somebody today who loves Christ in any little way occupied with Him and promoting His interests, and found in religious associations not in keeping with Him, the Lord would say that person is in associations far inferior to him. It is no question of the evil that may be there. It is not good enough for him, and so I would say to anybody here tonight who loves Jesus, who loves God, who in the bottom of his heart would like to promote His interests but in some way is associated with something that is connected with the world, some association that is unwarranted by Scripture, I am not saying anything about the evil, but it is not good enough for you there is something better than that. The Lord virtually says, This great building is not good enough for this woman. That gift of hers belongs to something greater than this. The Lord would bring you to see that He has a building of living stones and that He is the head of the corner and that the treasury of God is there and that your giving belongs there, not

where you are. It is not good enough for you. God has reserved some better things for us, and amongst these better things is the assembly, formed of living stones. Christ Himself is the builder and there are treasuries in it and the Lord would say to you, That is your place, and your giving is to be there.

That is all. I trust these remarks will help us in this city and those of us who are visiting as to this widow character of things and the various features it instructs us in, and particularly that we should see the better thing, what God has brought in, the greater and more perfect tabernacle, where the interests of those who love Him are. May God bless His word to us.

RECONCILIATION

Romans 11:15; 2 Corinthians 5:18 - 21; Colossians 1:20 - 22; Ephesians 2:16

These scriptures, as you will observe, speak of reconciliation, and that will be the subject of my remarks. It is a word that, as it appears in Scripture, requires careful consideration to be understood. We cannot always rely on ordinary meanings of words employed in our English translations. We are dependent on the Spirit to give us understanding of words, as well as of phrases, sentences and books, for the Spirit of God employs language from His own point of view, bearing in mind, of course, our intelligences, so that what He says should be intelligible to us. But still it is in words which the Holy Spirit employs, and we have to get His point of view, comparing spiritual with spiritual. And so the word used in the passage in Romans 11 has to be understood contextually, for it does not mean that the world and all the persons that are in it as a system are reconciled. It means that God graciously regards it in that way for provisional reasons, as He regarded Jerusalem and the Jews in the early part of Acts as inadvertent manslayers. They were regarded as doing things in ignorance, God graciously so regarding them until they showed themselves afresh to be still unaltered, sending a message after the Lord Jesus by Stephen. "We will not have this man to reign over us". That altered the position. Stephen's address showed that the position was altered, that they had always resisted the Holy Spirit and were still doing so, although they had every opportunity to clear themselves, if they really did not mean what they had done in crucifying Christ. They were held in grace as ignorant of what they did, and no doubt

they were, for the Lord on the cross says to the Father, "Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do", Luke 23:34. But still it came out that the more the import of what they did was brought home to them, the more they accepted it and convicted themselves as murderers of Christ, judged to be murderers by Stephen as pursuing the history of the nation from the outset. "Ye do always resist the Holy Spirit; as your fathers, ye also", Acts 7:51.

So that a change took place, and the apostle Paul says, "... wrath has come upon them to the uttermost", 1 Thessalonians 2:16, and so it is now with the world. John in his gospel regards the world as under the Lord's ministry as judged, anticipating what I have been saying. "Now is the judgment of this world", John 12:31, meaning the world as it stood in relation to the Jews. That world came to an end and has not been revived since. It is under wrath. "Wrath has come upon them to the uttermost", says the apostle. The world in Romans 11:15 is the world from the Gentile point of view, the world taken up in the form it is in Daniel, and in relation to that world God sent Christ, and was in Him "reconciling the world unto himself", 2 Corinthians 5:19? This indeed, as I was saying, included the Jewish world at the outset, but now that is altered. The word in this passage applies to the Gentile world. But God, in order to make a way for the gospel and to allay all prejudice, recognises it as, in a certain sense, under His ordering, for indeed it was He who ordered the Gentile monarchies. Their very existence is in view of the gospel. God has had the gospel in mind that it should be preached to the nations, and with a view to this, He ordered the world as it has been since the time of Nebuchadnezzar, presenting Christ to it, both in His Person and in the gospel, and the apostle goes so far as to say that the casting away of the Jews has meant the reconciling of the world; that is, it has come into the favour of God in a provisional

sense. He, in grace, is not imputing trespasses. Not that His government does not enter into it, not that wrath is not in view as a background for the gospel, but, although regarding the world as in His favour in a sense. He has removed what would interfere with the proclamation and results of the gospel. He would remove every possible hindrance, in so far as it could be, notwithstanding what the world is and what men in it are.

The present moment has an extraordinary significance, for God is reviving in it the dispensation as He started it. Whatever the outward results of the testimony of the saints who have been restored may be, God is looking for "a testimony to them", Matthew 10:18, as the Lord Jesus says. Whatever the results, God has a great regard for "a testimony to them" and He has restored the truth and many of His people to it, to the knowledge of Christ in heaven as Head, and He looks for it to be maintained, not only in a theoretic but in a very concrete way in our smaller measure. So it is that He has brought us back to these things, to the recognition of the powers that be, that they are ordained of God and that they are to be prayed for, that, in fact, we are to pray for kings and all that are in authority and give thanks for them and make intercession for them, for they are God's ministers. Not that He would have any pleasure in continuing the world as it is on account of itself, not that He has any pleasure in the thing as it is, but rather to make a way for what He has before Him in the dispensation, that is, the dispensation of grace Whatever persons rule the world, it is the time of the Kingdom of God in which grace reigns "through righteousness unto eternal life by Jesus Christ our Lord", Romans 5:21. That is a most important thing, dear brethren, at the present time, because God would bring us clearly round to His own thought in the dispensation. Whatever changes are taking place in this world, God

is saying that has nothing to do with it. He has not altered His position one iota. The throne of grace remains as firmly as ever, and the gospel goes out on that ground as clearly and freely as ever, so that in smaller measure the dispensation is maintained. That is a great point and God would lay it upon us. To illustrate this point in Romans 11, dear brethren, from the Old Testament, I would refer to Abraham because we nearly always get illustrations, or rather types, of the truth in the New Testament, in the Old; and usually in a way that makes the truth very practical to us.

So you get in Abraham, in the book of Genesis, the great idea of the attitude of God towards the world. He called Abraham out of it. There was a moral reason for that because, as it says in Romans 1:28, "... they did not like to retain God in their knowledge". He called Abraham out of it, but not to take him up to heaven at once -- not to take him, as it were, away out of the world, that is the world as the creation. We have to distinguish between the world as representative of the creation, and the world as a moral system. It is said of the Lord Jesus that He came into the world and the world was made by Him. That is not the moral system, it is the world as ornamented in creation. God did not propose to take Abraham out of that. As soon as Abraham came out of the moral system, God says to him, 'Every nation on earth is to be blessed through you', Genesis 18:18. That is the idea of reconciliation. You can understand, dear brethren, how Abraham would think of the world from that point onwards. In Romans 4:13 we are told that Abraham is the heir of the world. Now, if I am an heir to an estate or a throne or a business the thing takes a very different aspect in my mind from what it would otherwise. I am coming into it. And so Abraham would look at the nations. How many there were! Whatever their names, he would look at

the nations in that light. He would say, 'They are all mine in principle; it is only a matter of time'. Well, so it is, dear brethren, that we are heirs to the world. All that heirship, of course, belongs to Christ. Christ is the heir. As was said in the parable, "This is the heir", Matthew 21:38. He is the true Abraham, the heir of the world, and we are joint heirs with Him. And so in Abraham's case you see how he would look at the world henceforth. God says to a leading ruler at that time, Abimelech, the king of the Philistines, as regards this man Abraham, "He is a prophet", Genesis 20:7. God would have the rulers of the world understand that the saints are not against them, and so He says to Abimelech, "He shall pray for thee", Genesis 20:7. That was a great advantage to Abimelech, to have a man in his realm who was praying for him, whom God Himself designated as a prophet and said he would pray for Him. He was a priest as well.

You see, dear brethren, how that applies today. The Lord is in heaven. He is heir of the world and head of the nations, as indeed Simeon says, "A light for the revelation of the Gentiles", Luke 2:32. He is brought into view, not for cursing but for blessing, that the blessing of Abraham might arrive at the nations. You see how the Lord Jesus thinks of them as He looks down from heaven. They are all His. He is heir of the world, and His solicitude Godward is in regard of the nations. We are to reflect that, dear brethren. That very great office or function is accorded to us, to pray in this attitude, not only that Christ is heir of the world but that we are joint heirs. I have no doubt that the continuance of the dispensations stands in relation to that, and that the revival of the truth in its varied parts stands in that relation, and that God would enlarge the brethren to see how the matter stands internationally. God would have us with Himself as His friends, as Abraham was His friend, so that He might communicate His mind to

us in regard of these matters and that we might know how to pray, not with any national feeling, but as a heavenly people, as those who are waiting, but in the meantime would have the dispensation continued, for it is delightful to God to continue in this way to express His patience, for patience is a great attribute of God. "... the long suffering of our Lord is salvation", 2 Peter 3:15. God is not willing that any should perish, 2 Peter 3:9. This gives the saints a wonderful place in the eyes of heaven and, although men do not admit it, it is on their behalf, too. The continuance of things as they are is largely dependent on this great intercession of the Lord Jesus in heaven and ours upon earth. It is a wonderful platform, dear brethren, when we see this. It delivers us from all national feeling -- which is really nothing. To us it is a question of laying hold of the heavenly ground we are on as priests of God and heirs of the world and joint heirs with Christ, and of being solicitous on behalf of the world. What is so interesting to us is that the gospel, in however small a measure or with whatever small results, should continue as a testimony.

So with Isaac and Jacob, but especially with Jacob. You see how he acted towards Pharaoh. You see how Joseph was installed as the head of Pharaoh's kingdom. All that brings out what was promised to Abraham. All these were "heirs with him of the same promise". They all carried on this great principle, and especially Jacob. That is, he had not only the principle, but he had the power to convey the principle when he stood before Pharaoh. 'How old are you?' Genesis 47:8, says Pharaoh. Jacob, an old man, had already blessed the monarch, and had not asked his leave to do it, nor had the monarch forbade him to do it. He asked him about his age, and Jacob told him, but he was able to bless. You see what a place, dear brethren, the saints of God have in relation to this world, and how we may alter things that may be

contrary to the testimony in this way. And so with Joseph, for it was no accident that he became lord of all Egypt. It was a divinely appointed matter. All these men carry out this great idea of the reconciliation of the world -- in relation to Abraham, a figure of Christ as head of it. And so in Egypt God was not severe even with Pharaoh. God sent him a message and gave him an opportunity to let His people go. "Let my people go, that they may serve me", Exodus 7:16. It was only when resistance to the revealed mind of God took place formally that God struck. So it is in our own times, and it may not be far distant, for things take place so quickly in this world. We do not know how long the thing will continue. Our business is to see to it that it does continue; that is, from the standpoint of joint heirs with Christ and priesthood to God, our prayers should continue. You see the magnitude of the position. Presently the whole position will be changed. When the saints leave, things will happen very quickly. In what is called a crisis, the whole world will veer round and Christianity will be overthrown, not only in principle but formally, officially, as it is in some nations today. Then it is that the divine attitude changes, and that this verse which I have read to you is no longer in force. In the meantime, our business is to continue on in the light of the dispensation in which we are as priests unto God.

The next thing I want to speak about is the ministerial side of this in 2 Corinthians 5. The apostle, as you will all know, in these epistles greatly stresses his ministerial authority. What corresponds in the Old Testament is the books of Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers and also Deuteronomy, but particularly Exodus. These are the ministerial books. What that means, dear brethren, is the idea of Romans 11:15; not only that it is in force, but that it is explained it is made intelligible by ministerial services. Ministerial

services mean qualified, cultured, trained or taught persons to represent God in this world, That is what the apostle represents. As the apostle Paul says, "... all things are of the God who has reconciled us to himself by Jesus Christ" -- alluding to himself particularly, to those that represent God -- "and given to us the ministry of that reconciliation", 2 Corinthians 5:18. He has given it to us. That is a very great thing. That is to say, to a trained ministry, fitted of God to represent Him and to make the thing plain and effective. "How that God was in Christ, reconciling the world to himself, not reckoning to them their offences", 2 Corinthians 5:19. Now he is bringing it round to effectiveness, and he says, "We are ambassadors therefore for Christ, God as it were beseeching by us, we entreat for Christ, Be reconciled to God", 2 Corinthians 5:20. Be reconciled. It was not exactly saying that the Corinthians were not, although they were refractory. In practice they were not, yet in principle they were, as believers in the gospel. At the same time, their condition required that he should bring this to bear upon them. "Be reconciled to God". Then he goes on to give the basis of it. "Him who knew not sin he has made sin for us that we might become God's righteousness in him", 2 Corinthians 5:21. What a basis! How well the apostle knew how to bring out the full bearing of that wonderful atoning sacrifice of Jesus, that it was not only a question of our sins but that we might be made the righteousness of God. Think of the greatness of that thought. Be made it. Not only that we should have it to appear before God, but that we should be the very expression of it. It will be so by and by. The Lord will point to us as the expression of His righteousness by and by, but surely it has a bearing today -- that God can point to some people in this world as representative of His righteousness. Not only that they are made righteous, but that they are made "the righteousness of God in him". Think of that! What a bearing it

should have upon us in our practical ways and walk, that God, as it were, can point to us.

Perhaps it hardly enters into some of our hearts that God talks about us daily, and points to us, too. Satan is coming up constantly as he did in the days of Job. God said to Satan, "Hast thou considered my servant Job?" Job 1:8. Is he the only saint that God brings forward in that way? No! It is to remind us that we are the subject of conversation in heaven, and that God thinks of us here in the place where He has set us and would call attention to us as He would to Abraham. We are told in the Psalms that "he reproved kings for their sakes; saying, Touch not mine anointed", Psalm 105:14. He speaks to kings about us. How beautiful and great it is if God could call attention to me tonight in heaven, could call the attention of the devil and say, 'See that man (or any of us here). See what he is. Have you considered him?' You may be sure that Satan has considered him all his life and God calls attention to the beautiful traits of His own work in His people. He says, 'Look at them. They are My righteousness'. See how He challenged Balaam. 'Look at those people. You cannot curse those people'. "Who shall lay any thing to the charge of God's elect? It is God that justifieth", Romans 8:33. Satan did, but God says they are justified. "He hath not beheld iniquity in Jacob, neither hath he seen perverseness in Israel", Numbers 23:21. God says, 'Look at these people. They are made My righteousness'. What a testimony that is! How attractive that is, that one should be such as the Lord could call attention to in that way.

And so in regard of this ministerial matter the types again help us. The book of Exodus, I believe, confirms and amplifies what I am saying. Moses is the great minister and represents the ministry, and much is made of him. There is more said of him, perhaps, than of any of the ministers of the Old Testament. What an interesting person he is! He

was taken up from his infancy, and what a favour it was to Pharaoh's court that God allowed that man to be in that court. Was that nothing? It was the way God looked at things. He provided a daughter in the house of Pharaoh and she was favourable. She represented in a certain way divine traits. She takes the babe and has compassion on the babe. Was that nothing? It was the work of God to take up that babe and place him in the house of Pharaoh for forty years. What a testimony! I do not say that Moses was very much, but he was Moses, and he was exceeding fair to God, we are told, before he wept. He was taken by a woman who had no antipathy towards him; she had compassion on the weeping child. She became his saviour for the moment and took him to the house of Pharaoh. There are many such today who, under the government of God, are in the world. What an advantage. But how many of them are acting like Moses? "By faith Moses, when he was come to years, refused to be called the son of Pharaoh's daughter; choosing rather to suffer affliction with the people of God, than to enjoy the pleasures of sin for a season", Hebrews 11:25. "By faith he forsook Egypt, not fearing the wrath of the king", Hebrews 11:27. That is the minister. He is now away from Egypt. The wrath of the king has forced him out. The king is becoming more and more hardened against God, but it is the patience of God waiting upon him, and now from forty years up to eighty years of age Moses was in the desert under the eye of God in a preparatory school. He led the flock to the backside of the desert. There the angel of the Lord appeared to him in a thorn-bush, Exodus 3:2. That is, dear brethren, where we get the idea of the minister becoming reconciled. He came under the mind of God in a peculiar way. He turned aside to see why the bush burned and was not consumed. He turned aside to see it. It alludes to the humanity of Christ, to the incarnation. It alludes

to what Israel had to go through in the desert, but there is Christ. God was in the bush -- in the most lowly circumstances in the thorn-bush -- and Moses stopped to look at that. He had been accustomed to great things in Pharaoh's house, but now he is engaged with a lowly thing, a thorn-bush. But there is something present in that thorn-bush that the bush burned and was not consumed. It was a question of the humanity of Christ. "The Word became flesh, and dwelt among us and we have contemplated his glory", John 1:14. It is in that way, dear brethren, that the minister comes in for reconciliation. I wonder if you understand what I am presenting. What was Moses under God's eye as he turned aside? There never had been such a Moses before. It was a Moses occupied with Jesus, in type, I mean. Heaven saw it and heaven says, "Moses, Moses", Exodus 3:4. Heaven is expressing itself in profound interest in this man. His name was never called out before the angel called it out. Jehovah did it. Moses is coming into reconciliation. He is identified in his mind with this great thing. He will come into it more and more. He will grow in it. But, as the apostle Paul says, he was being reconciled to God, not God to him. He was being reconciled to God. He was becoming delightful to God as never before. He is now in his mind taken up typically with Christ and so the process goes on. In Exodus 23 and 24 you see how Israel is come into reconciliation. First the minister and then those who are ministered to. The Lord would make this point to us. Do we understand this? Do we understand being brought into this attitude of reconciliation, that God looks upon us with the utmost complacency? It is because Christ has come into our minds. We are occupied with Christ as God has announced Him and has called attention to Him. 'I am going on with this, and you are going on with this, and you are pleasing to Me. You are

not going on with anything else. You have grasped My mind and I am delighted with you'. That is really what is meant. God says to Moses and Aaron and Nadab and Abihu and seventy of the elders of Israel, "Come up", Exodus 24:1. Would He have them come up to His place to grieve His heart? No, beloved brethren. It is reconciled people, a people He would have before Him for His pleasure. That is the idea. They went up, and, we are told, "they saw the God of Israel; and there was under his feet as it were work of transparent sapphire", Exodus 24:10. What a sight! It says they ate and drank and He did not lay His hand on the nobles. They were pleasing to Him. It is a question of Moses turning round first and occupying himself with what God presented to him. It is Christ in the bush, Christ incarnate, and Moses is occupied with it. God says, 'That is a wonderful thing you are occupied with and I want you to be thoroughly adjusted to it'. "Put off thy shoes from off thy feet", Exodus 3:5. Then there are wonderful unfoldings of God to him right through, and now he is invited up and others with him. Israel, in principle, are in reconciliation and are invited up into the presence of God and are perfectly free there.

Now I want to make some remarks about Colossians. Colossians 1:19, which precedes what I read, speaks about Christ being the dwelling place of all the fulness of the deity. The word 'deity' is not there. The word 'fulness' takes the place of the word 'greatness' in Hebrews, meaning that 'Deity' is referred to. All the fulness was there. It is not simply all the attributes, but God, the Deity, was there. It is not now the covenant God, it is the Deity -- that is the Latin word. It means God in His absoluteness. We must get this word into our minds -- I mean the idea of God in His infinite absoluteness. Paul has this always in mind. "Of him, and through him, and for him are all things", Romans 11:36.

And so it says that "in him all the fulness ... was pleased to dwell, and by him to reconcile all things to itself", (as it should read, for it is a question of the neuter) "having made peace by the blood of his cross", Colossians 1:20. You have to understand that expression. The cross had no blood. It alludes to the blood that flowed, not from the nail-prints, for that would not mean death in itself. Death took place before the blood flowed. That was properly atoning blood. It is the actual state of death that is in mind. Only John gives us that side. How significant! Paul calls it here "the blood of his cross". It flowed while He was on the cross. What a death! The forsaking had taken place before, but now He is dead, in the state of death. A most solemn thing to think of. It is by that blood that peace is made. God has done that, and on that ground He is free. Now there is peace. He has taken away the things that would harass Him in His work of reconciliation. There is no disturbing element in persons or things in the whole universe. What a marvellous thought! The apostle goes on to say "and you ... hath he reconciled", that is the Gentiles, we might say ourselves, for Colossians has the Gentiles in view. "To present you holy and unblameable and unreprovable in his sight", Colossians 1:22. In His sight or in its sight, as it should read. That is, in the sight of the Deity, of the Godhead. Think of our being taken up so as to be delightful to the Deity, to God in His absoluteness. See the place we have, dear brethren. God has done that.

There is an 'if' following. It shows how God had in His mind how very quickly this would be slipped away from. He has now revived it. It is His wish that we stand firmly in this great and glorious thought that He has reconciled us in the body of Christ's flesh through death, to present us unblameable and unreprovable in His sight. In His sight. It is not now the reconciliation of the world, but what is in His

sight, that is, what His eyes are resting upon, the saints viewed as holy and unblameable and unreprovable in His sight. There is nothing at all to reprove. One saint spoke of the joy of an unrebuking gaze from God. Think of being able to stand in the presence of that! In His sight, as it says. It is before Him in this passage.

Then in Ephesians we have the collective thought where it is stated that He has reconciled both -- both Jew and Gentile, that is, believers from both Jews and Gentiles -- "in one body to God by the cross", Ephesians 2:16. Peace indeed has been made by the blood of His cross, but here the reconciliation is by the cross. The enmity is slain by it, too. This is a word for us as to our practical relations with one another. What I have been applying to each of us individually is to apply to us as together. The enmity must be slain. God has done it. He looks at it as done in regard to the Ephesians and in regard to the saints at that time, but in its practical application you can see that there must be the slaying of the enmity. Enmity is a terrible thing to creep in amongst the people of God and the slaying of it is by the cross. It is an exalted way of dealing with it. What shame, what ignominy entered into the cross and the sacrificial work of Christ, and all to deal with this horrid thing called the flesh, in which enmity towards one another is so apt to wreck and spoil reconciliation. He hath reconciled "both in one body to God by the cross" -- slaying the enmity. Dear brethren, this is a very practical word, especially in the light of Matthew, the Lord Himself alluding there to a brother offering a sacrifice. He touches on many things in those chapters in Matthew 5, 6 and 7, and amongst these things says "Therefore if thou bring thy gift to the altar, and there rememberest that thy brother hath aught against thee",; one is pretty sure to remember there, for God is there. God is where sacrifice is being

offered sincerely and if God be there He will search you through and through. How terrible a thing it is, dear brethren, to sit down together with enmity, with a sense that others have things against us. In the presence of God we are searched. Nowhere else are we searched in that way. "And there rememberest that thy brother hath ought against thee; leave there thy gift before the altar, and go thy way". It makes everything of the gift. God is looking after it all the time you are away to see your brother. It is under His eye; it is your sacrifice. It has not lost its value because your brother has something against you, but He is testing you out as to what you are. There should be grace in us to overcome evil with good. That is victory to you and to Him. "Go thy way; first be reconciled to thy brother, and then come and offer thy gift", Matthew 5:24. You alone can offer it, but be reconciled to thy brother. That verse enters into this verse in Ephesians. He has reconciled "both unto God in one body", Ephesians 2:16. God can look upon a company of saints as pleasing to Him as a company -- there is no enmity. The enmity is slain by the cross; that is, it will be eternally, and by and by in the millennium, too. Things will come under God's eye for His pleasure and He looks for it now in a time of adversity and contrariety, so that the brethren are great enough morally, in the Spirit, and having the blood of Jesus to apply, and the water too, so that there should be no enmity, that there should be the practical expression of reconciliation in the saints viewed as together. It is a wonderful thing that God is working out -- that is the assembly in its local setting, for there is only one assembly, but still there are subdivisions in local settings. God is working out a great matter in the wilderness, in a scene of contrariety, and what can be greater than to bring about reconciliation in persons who were hitherto alienated in mind, and alienated to one

another, but are now reconciled in one body by the cross, having slain the enmity.

That is what I have in mind tonight, dear brethren, and I would commend that you take it home. One feels the power of it. What great things God has in His mind in these last days, that is, to bring about in the end what He began as a testimony.

PRAYER

Luke 3:21,22; 2 Chronicles 7:1,2,12; Acts 4:23 - 31; Daniel 9:1 - 3, Daniel 9:20 - 25

My subject, dear brethren, is prayer. I wish not only to speak of those features that appear in these scriptures, the subject really being very extensive. I wish to show first how it appeared in Jesus. As in all else, He has the first place. In all things He has the pre-eminence. He is not only at the beginning, but He is the beginning. Although coming in later than many who prayed, yet all anticipated His presence here, God having had perfection in His mind from the outset. Christ was no afterthought in any sense. In making Adam, forming and creating Adam, Christ was in the mind of God, for he was the figure, we are told, of Him that was to come, and in taking others up, from Adam onwards, in any way, God always had Christ in His mind. However far short they may have come, all the great instrumentalities that God took up had Christ in God's mind. In Abel, in Enoch, in Noah and in Abraham, one after another, taken up and fitted for some service, God always had Christ in mind, each representing some feature; however feebly expressed, the feature was there in the mind of God, and was there in a way that perhaps we have never seen it, for He is always occupied with His own idea. So this signal occasion meant that God had reached it in regard of prayer -- in regard of other things, too, but Luke alone mentions the prayer, the attitude the Lord was in as coming up out of the waters of Jordan. Not that the Lord had not prayed before; of course He had. He says, indeed, that He was cast upon God from the very outset of His being here, the extent of His prayers in His early years only known to God and Himself. But now He is engaged

in it at a peculiar time. It was an epoch-making time, a situation really intended for Him, although giving others an opportunity to set themselves right with God, for it was a time of setting things right under John's ministry. Others were involved, of course, and came to John from all quarters to be baptised, but the occasion, the service, had Jesus in mind. It was to make the way of the Lord, to make way for Him. It was a great occasion, the most signal occasion of that great ministry of John's, and it was arranged beforehand. God foreseeing and knowing what He would do, how Jesus should come into this wonderful picture; He had it all arranged, in no sense more than in John himself. The beautiful spirit that he always evinces always affects one. He was full of his own nothingness in the presence of Jesus. No one, perhaps, in the multitude that came had such a sense of the greatness of Jesus. According to John the evangelist, he disappears from this world saying, "He must increase, but I must decrease", John 3:30. It shines here, for the Lord is praying, according to Luke, as if God were to call attention to prayer, knowing its history from the outset in the many that prayed, knowing how befitting it was in man, especially as entering on the service of God. This was a scene peculiarly fitted for heaven's delight, but it was more than that; heaven would have attention called to it. Although the voice speaks to Jesus here, it speaks of Him elsewhere, and what comes out, dear brethren, as a practical lesson, is that God is pleased with us as in prayer. He was supremely pleased with Jesus and said so, but He is pleased with everyone that is truly engaged in prayer. It is an attitude that peculiarly delights the eye of heaven and the ear of heaven -- an encouragement for us, for it may be that in the quiet hours of the night when we are wakeful, or even in the busy hours of the day when we are pressed, it is a pleasure to God to know a

heart is turning to Him, however briefly; and however inarticulate the prayer, it is known to Him, it is part, if I might so say reverently, of the life of God. You understand what I mean. You must apply the idea to God; the very words are used: a certain thing is estranged from the life of God. We should not think He is different in that sense from us. God is capable of enjoying what is enjoyable according to Him. He expects it, He looks for it. Leviticus is full of this thought as in the offerings. The offerings, the types in Leviticus, open up a wonderful field for thought as to what God is. As the apostle reminds the Athenians, we ought to think something of God, because of what we are, because we are said to be His offspring. He brings that in in regard of what man is physically and constitutionally, but how much more so, dear brethren, in regard of Christians, who are partakers of the divine nature, who are brought to know God, who are born of Him, indeed, in a spiritual sense. We should understand, even from that point of view, that there are things He enjoys, that His life consists in that way, in Christ "in whom I have found my delight", Luke 3:22. The life of God, the enjoyment of God, entered into that. Certain history has begun in Jesus now publicly; it had been there privately. God had been enjoying it all these thirty years. As I said, the sacrifices, as types, are full of this thought -- the bread of God, what He enjoys; and the drink-offerings, all that would satisfy His heart and even, to speak carefully and reverently, to stimulate Him, for there is the wine required, the strong drink. So that relatively, in the weary, perhaps wakeful hours of the night, or in the pressing hours of the day, whatever the employment, the feeble Christian turning to God not only receives succour but occasions joy in measure. I shall come to that presently more fully, only to show you the perfection of the idea in Christ. Luke would have us

to understand how God the Father found His joy in this sense -- in other senses, of course, but Luke brings this point in, and greatly enlarges on the Lord praying, as many of us know, more than any other of the evangelists. It is that which is proper to man here, and not only that, but it occasions joy to God, and how much more so in regard of ourselves, dear brethren, when we come together, as it is said, for prayer. You will all remember how, in that well-known precious chapter, Acts 16, the Spirit of God says through the writer, even Luke, "As we went to prayer", Acts 16:13. A certain damsel, having the spirit of Python, called attention to the apostle and his companions, "These men are the servants of the most high God, which shew unto us the way of salvation", Acts 16:17. This is what she said. What was heaven thinking about at that time? Heaven was thinking about those men going to prayer; not the millennium; Heaven was not thinking of the millennium then, that was long ahead. Heaven is always occupied with the present, with what there is; and what there was then was men going to prayer, and Satan knew that and would defeat the divine thought and rob the divine eye and the divine ear of its pleasure. Let us not forget this, dear brethren, that the enemy is set against us as we are going to the prayer meeting, as we call it, and would frustrate our efficiency, our priestly power, and defeat the divine end and divine pleasure.

And now I move on to the Old Testament, to show how this works out. Solomon's prayer is perhaps the longest we get in the Old Testament, or in the whole Bible. It is a wonderfully laid out prayer -- no mere repetition of words, no vain repetition. It is wonderfully copious, covering territory and time immensely. He had prepared, we are told, a platform of bronze, the measurements all denoting what is spiritual, and he kneeled down and spread forth his hands to heaven. Heaven saw all that. Attitudinarianism, in itself,

is not of any value, but certainly there is an attitude that God delights in, and Solomon here is in a proper attitude and prays, as I said, in the most orderly way. Heaven saw and heard. It was a great day for heaven, as it was for the myriads of Israel present -- the very acme of the kingdom, of the exercises of David, the result of them, for Solomon was but a counterpart of David. Indeed, Solomon is Christ in heaven, the exalted Jesus. David is the suffering Jesus, and so as Jesus is about to enter heaven through death, He prayed, too -- the greatest of all prayers, I need not say. We are not told what He was praying about on the banks of Jordan, but we are told what He was praying about in John 17, as He was about to die. He lifted up His eyes to heaven; it does not say His hands, but His eyes. Those eyes were met by the Father's. What a moment it was! I might say, anticipating the true Solomon, for He is already anticipating that all is over on earth; and this is the attitude ever since on high. The first thing on high, we may say, He received of the Father the promise of the Spirit. But He has told us ere going up that He was about to beg for that, He was about to pray for that, so that we might understand the wonderful economy in which we are, that it is an economy set up in man, in that way in dependence, and that we are brought into it especially in prayer; that we are brought into the economy of God set up in Jesus, who is our great exemplar in everything, but particularly now in this. He says, "I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter", John 14:16, and as gone on high, Peter tells us "having received of the Father the promise of the Holy Spirit, he has poured out this", Acts 2:33. The gift of the Spirit was the greatest possible result as a gift from heaven.

Well now, Solomon is anticipative of all this, foreshadowing it, only opening up some things as to the divine side; after the long orderly prayer in such an

attitude as is described, it is said that when he finished the glory of the Lord filled the house, "the fire came down from heaven, and consumed the burnt-offering and the sacrifices; and the glory of the Lord filled the house", 2 Chronicles 7:1. That is to say, Solomon is praying in regard of the house, a matter that should have our special attention in our meetings in our individual prayers and in our collective prayers. The house of God is a great thought with Him. It is that in which not only we find practical salvation, but in which He has scope Himself, for He has a free hand. It involves the family thought. It involves the banishment of all that is contrary to family feeling and affection, so that he promises in the prophets (Isaiah 56) to the eunuchs and to the sons of the alien that keep His sabbaths -- that is those who rest in Christ, who observe the sign of the covenant, for us the Lord's supper -- to all such He says, "even them will I ... make joyful in my house of prayer", Isaiah 56:7. That is a beautiful thought, for the prayer meetings are perhaps sometimes a little dull to us, in our minds at any rate, but it is not the divine intent that they should be. God will participate in them Himself, He has joy in them, and He would make us joyful. Whatever we may be externally, an alien without family, without children or relatives to reciprocate our affections; whatever there may be of that kind, those who keep the sabbaths of God, who abide in the covenant of God, who recognise the sign of it, which is the Lord's supper today, those who do such things have a great place with God in heaven and in His house, and He says, I will make them "joyful in my house of prayer". It is a great place, He says in it you will come into an atmosphere of universality -- it is a place of prayer for all nations, and, dear brethren, that is an important thing, that we should not be narrowed up to our own localities and our own affairs, but have a universal outlook and feeling for

the house of God. The house of prayer is a place of prayer for all nations. How the Lord felt all this when He made a scourge of small cords and cast out the dove sellers and money changers -- that is to say, all that is contrary to this, all that interferes with what the divine intent is in the house. And so in Solomon's case, we have a primary idea. It says, "as he finished praying". He was allowed to finish. It was a greater thing really than Peter's address to Cornelius and his company, because God acted and filled them with His Spirit before Peter finished. It says, "When Solomon had made an end of praying, the fire came down from heaven, and consumed the burnt offering and the sacrifices; and the glory of the Lord" (or Jehovah) "filled the house", 2 Chronicles 7:1. He had made an end -- another suggestion that it is important to make an end; that is, if we are praying, to have a definite end in mind -- a beginning and an end, not a wandering thing. God has no pleasure in that; He wants definiteness, something that has a beginning and an end, and that there should not be too much space between the beginning and the end, for the apostle says, "I will pray with the spirit, and I will pray with the understanding also", 1 Corinthians 14:15. Your spiritual feelings are in it and your spiritual understanding is in it -- there is a beginning and an end. Solomon made an end of praying. God allowed him to finish. Every word was pleasing; the attitude of the prayer, of the priest, as I may call him, was pleasing to heaven, and as he made an end the fire came out and consumed the burnt-offering. That is to say, God, in that remarkable way, showed His delight in what was representative, sacrificially, of Solomon and the people. They were in reconciliation, as I may say, and then the glory filled the house -- a point in the meeting for prayer that is, perhaps, hardly ever reached, but it simply means, as I understand it, that a point is reached as the brethren proceed, praying

with the spirit, praying with the understanding, covering the ground, covering the needs, when God would say, 'I like that; I want all that; I am restful in that'. It is turned from a scene of need into a scene of glory, such is the wonderful transforming power, dear brethren, that is here. And so we find in Luke as to the Lord, that as He prayed on the mount of Transfiguration, the fashion of His countenance became different, that is, there was a change. That is the idea, that you change from the sense of need into the sense of glory, God Himself taking over the scene and filling it with a sense of what He is, of His appreciation of man lifting up holy hands in intelligence -- in priestly intelligence -- without wrath or reasoning. And then we are told after this in the verse I read down the chapter, that there was an appearing subsequently. Jehovah appeared to Solomon, "Then Jehovah appeared to Solomon by night, and said to him: I have heard thy prayer, and I have chosen for myself this place for a house of sacrifice", 2 Chronicles 7:12. For a house of sacrifice. Now I would just call attention, dear brethren, to how that God is not only content -- and it brings out what He is and what we should prove, too, in our relations with Him -- that He is not only content to fill the scene with His glory, a scene of prayer, to show how pleased He is with the brethren as together according to His mind, but He comes in later and tells us that He has heard what we have prayed for. We know that He hears us. We are told in the first epistle of John, "And this is the boldness which we have towards him, that if we ask him anything according to his will he hears us", 1 John 5:14. How sweet that is, to have the sense that you are heard. "I have heard thy prayer" -- and what an answer, too. First of all, "I have chosen for myself this place for a house of sacrifice". How sweet that is in the night seasons. You know, as we get older, we do not need as much

sleep as the younger ones do. The night seasons have a place in Scripture -- a great place. If you look through, you will see how God seizes the night seasons, and even sleep, to reveal Himself. Here He appeared. This word 'appeared' is a most suggestive and instructive word. It is not merely that you get a communication but you get an impression in an appearing. It is not the same as you saw before. Solomon had an earlier appearing. It is, indeed, stated that Jehovah appeared to him twice, and it was a serious matter when he turned aside. A second appearing is not a repetition of the first -- it is different. There is some other feature shown, for the divine features are varied. God would have us to be impressed with them, and the appearing here would have relation to the prayer; He says I have taken on this house, I have taken it over, and He goes on to say that He had listened to the prayer and He would answer it. All this is most practical, dear brethren, as to our prayers: how God gives us a sense that He has heard and that He will take account and that He will do, that all is noted, that nothing will ever be forgotten by God. What I am speaking of particularly now is the impression that He would convey in an appearing -- that you get a fresh conception of God in an appearing.

I go on to the Acts, for a moment. It is a well-known passage and the point in it I have in mind, is that it is a prayer in relation to the conflict; two servants, Peter and John, had been in conflict, and had stood well and God gave victory after victory, and "being let go, they came to their own company", Acts 4:23 -- a very beautiful thought. The outstanding servants came back to their own company, like Paul and Barnabas, later, who come back to Antioch, to take their places with the brethren. They came to their own company, and if you take the word 'company' out of it, it would be accurate enough:

they came to their own -- the stress is on that word, a word that is found often in this sense -- and they related what had happened. What a season they must have had together, the brethren recounting the support they had in the conflict and in their sufferings, and how the testimony was making headway. It was a time of great triumph. And now, what comes out is "as they prayed". I do not go into the details of the prayer. You will observe that the words, the phrases used, and the things referred to are but a little removed from the Old Testament way and form, but the words are just what were suitable at this juncture. They speak of the creation, they refer to the second Psalm, a very intelligible and intelligent prayer at this particular juncture, but not such as you get later. Only, as I said, it was not very much removed from the Old Testament in words, but very much removed as regards the spirit that entered into it, because instead of asking for vengeance, they are asking God to heal their enemies, to stretch forth His hands in healing. It is a very great triumph for the testimony in conflict, and that is most pleasing to God. Earlier, Solomon had asked for certain things from God and God said to him, I have heard what you asked and I am going to give you what you asked for. I like very much what you asked for; you did not ask for anything against your enemies. We have to be careful in our prayers not to pray for our brethren as our enemies. It is the last thought one should have, that a Christian could be his enemy. The more I learn to look at the saints abstractly with the divine view, the less I will allow such a thought as that. The spirit is to overcome evil with good. Stretch forth Thy hand, they say, in healing. They ask God to come in and carry on as He had been. As a matter of fact, this prayer is not only an inauguration prayer, it is a continuing prayer -- a great matter to be in our minds. God gives impulses, at

times, but the thing is to maintain what He inaugurates and supports, that it may be carried on at its proper level, and that is what this chapter means. The prayer is according to the mind of God, and it says, "And when they had prayed, the place in which they were assembled shook", Acts 4:31. Now, dear brethren, what I mean to convey to you is that this is for continuance. It is that the testimony should be maintained at its proper level, a very important thing, that if God gives us any advantage, we do not lose that, we maintain it. He would have it maintained. He has given it to be maintained, and the way is by prayer. It can only be done by divine power, nothing can be done without divine power. The way of obtaining divine power is by prayer and hence they prayed here, and they prayed delightfully to heaven, that is, it was suitable for the moment, and heaven, as they finished, shook the place where they were assembled. That was not a shake to cause alarm, there was no suggestion in it whatever of that kind. They were not alarmed. It was a friendly shake, it was love, as much as to say, 'This is the kind of thing you can rely upon. Your attitude is right. Maintain that attitude and heaven will maintain you'. It is a great matter to keep the right attitude, the right outlook, whatever your feelings or your outward circumstances. Maintain the right outlook, even if it is only abstractly, and God will support you. Then your prayers will be according to that, and God will support us. So that the place, it says, was shaken. What a moment that was! There was no suggestion of fear, but it goes on to say that they were all filled with the Holy Spirit and spake the word of God with boldness, and then in verse 33, "with great power did the apostles give witness of the resurrection of the Lord Jesus, and great grace was upon them all". There are other verses, but there is not time to go into them, but to take the whole

passage as it stands, it means that the testimony is still on the level of the second chapter, there is no deterioration, and God is pleased with the attitude of the persons who pray and He says, 'I am with you in it. I will maintain you in that attitude', and they did not have long to wait. There was a friendly shake of the building, whatever it was -- the upper room or any other -- and they were all filled with the Spirit; not with fear, but with the Spirit and they spake the word of God with power, and then the general state of the saints is according to what we get in chapter 2; the level is the same, God is maintaining the level. It is a very important matter that there should be no deterioration but a full maintenance of the level that God has inaugurated, and it says "with great power did the apostles give witness of the resurrection of the Lord Jesus", Acts 4:33. That was the point for the moment. Later on, other things came in -- a heavenly testimony -- but the point for the moment was the power of God in the resurrection of Jesus, and with great power the apostles gave witness to that, and the saints were all in accord with what the leaders were going on with.

If you will bear with me, I will say a word about Daniel. I have spoken about Jesus as illustrating the great thought of prayer and why God has pleasure in it, and the house taken over in Chronicles, and now the testimony maintained in its full power in answer to prayer. Now I want to say a word as to the time, as to the dispensation, as to what is coming. It is said that the Lord God would do nothing but He would make it known to His servants the prophets. That is to say, God has what may be called His friends. He would look for us to be His friends. Friendship for God is a very great thought, and it affords Him great satisfaction that He has those in whom He can confide and to whom He can make communications, to whom He can unfold what is in

His mind as to the present and as to the future. In the book of Daniel, this is connected with prayer. This is one of the most interesting prayers that we get in Scripture. In Daniel we get a great deal of instruction in regard of time. Daniel says that he understood by books, that is, he was going to pray intelligently; that is, we get the mind of God from the Scriptures -- this prayer refers to the aid that we get from the Scriptures -- the prophetic word particularly. Daniel tells us that he writes at the time of Darius, the Mede, and tells us something about him, and then says, "In the first year of his reign, I Daniel understood by books the number of the years, whereof the word of the Lord came to Jeremiah the prophet, that he would accomplish seventy years in the desolations of Jerusalem", Daniel 1:2. Now there is a word for all young brothers and sisters. My impression is that our book-cases are not large enough, not well selected. There is a great deal in them that is of very little value morally, and there are many works, many books that God intended should be in our book-cases that are not there. They are available. Of course, Daniel is here referring to the prophet Jeremiah, to an inspired record, but he says "I understood by books", and it would be well that the brethren should be conversant with books. The apostle Paul says, "bring ... the books, especially the parchments", 2 Timothy 4:13. Bring the books, for every bit of aid that God has furnished He looks for its appropriation. He looks for us to be conversant, to fully follow up, as was said to Timothy, what God gives, so that we might have understanding of the times and to know what Israel ought to do. So Daniel understood by books. It is not a revelation here, yet; he is going to get one. We are encouraged from this passage to read, and God would help us as we move in the light of what we get, and He gives us more. "He that hath, to him shall be given", Mark 4:25. It is a general principle,

and it is unalterable. "And he that hath not, from him shall be taken even that which he hath", -- a very solemn matter. God looks for diligence in following up what He gives. And so, as Daniel understood, he says, "And I set my face unto the Lord God, to seek by prayer and supplications, with fasting, and sack-cloth, and ashes", Daniel 9:3. This is a very beautiful picture of a man who valued prayer, who sought the mind of God, and who valued it and knew how to get it. Indeed, in Daniel's history, you hear of him getting things on his bed, meaning that God gave them sovereignly to him; it is not a question of his own exercise. Exercise is well set out here, as it is in Paul and Elijah -- he put his face between his knees. Here you have sackcloth and fasting, as well as prayer. He goes on to pray and confess his sins, and then in the latter verses I read, you find he says, "And whiles I was speaking, and praying, and confessing my sin", Daniel 9:20. Speaking and praying. I just read this. It speaks for itself. What a praying man or woman is to God, that is, in the true sense of the word, especially if one is harassed by international conditions and what is going to happen. God would have us turn to Him to get His mind as to things, and He opens up to us far more than we ask for. Daniel had only in his mind seventy years, but Gabriel says "thou art greatly beloved". "I am now come forth to make thee skilful of understanding. At the beginning of thy supplications the word went forth, and I am come to declare it", Daniel 9:22. Is that written for Daniel only? No, beloved, it is written for us, for our encouragement, that we through the comfort and encouragement of the Scriptures might have hope. No situation is too difficult. We have the Scriptures, and we have it in books that help us to understand the Scriptures, but we get more. And so, Daniel here not only gets something about seventy years which were now coming to an

end -- the desolations were to be over in seventy years, but that was only preliminary -- Gabriel has much more in his mind than that. He has got seventy weeks of years, and those seventy weeks of years began well over two thousand years ago. You see how God enlarges far beyond our expectations. He does "exceeding abundantly above all that we ask or think", Ephesians 3:20, and it is not only the ending of the desolations -- desolations indeed would come, greater and more terrible than had even been known in Israel, and they are to come yet -- a terrible consummation of all the thoughts of God in regard to Jerusalem and His earthly people; but there are seventy weeks, a determined time. There would be sixty-nine weeks of years unto the Messiah, the Prince; there would be the bringing in of everlasting righteousness and there would be an anointing of the holy of holies. What a word that was for Daniel! We can go further than that. The book of Revelation opens up much more than that, dear brethren. It includes this wonderful prophecy that Daniel, and no one else, had, but it includes the heavenly side as well, that God would show to a praying brother or sister who is exercised about international matters, what He is going to do, what is coming in. The glory of the assembly in its heavenly relations is added to all this. It is not only the establishment of Jerusalem, the bringing in of everlasting righteousness, but the coming out from God of the heavenly city, depicted so wonderfully, inclusive of ourselves -- the heavenly city lying four-square, so beautifully depicted in the twenty-first chapter of the book of Revelation.

That is all I had in mind; to show you what prayer means, and how God would lead us to it, and how, if we are led to it and take it up in this way, we shall find much more than we ever anticipated. We shall find "exceeding abundantly" above all that we have asked or thought. There is no limit to what

God will do for His people. "Thou art greatly beloved". How near it is to the word on the banks of the Jordan, but it anticipated that same blessed Man, for Daniel was but an anticipation, a foreshadowing of Jesus, the Man greatly beloved.

NEWNESS

Romans 6:4; Romans 7:6; Romans 12:2

What I have in mind dear brethren is to speak about 'newness' as it appears in these three scriptures: newness of life, newness of spirit, and newness of mind by the renewing of our mind. The thought appearing in this threefold way in this epistle shows that it is a fundamental one, and correspondingly involves what is different in a religious sense from anything that has preceded it. The prevalence of the word 'new' in the book of Revelation shows unmistakably that it is to mark the assembly at the end of the dispensation. We have it written in the term "new Jerusalem" to the overcomer in the assembly at Philadelphia, as if to remind us that the overcomer would know that the word 'new' fits at the end as it did at the beginning.

Religion has become prevalent not in the heathen or Jewish sense but in the Christian sense, using common phraseology. When Romans was written religion was either Pagan or Jewish. Now we have the Pagan continuing, and the Jewish only in a little way. We have Mahometanism and we have about a quarter of the world's population nominally Christian, so that the idea of religion is extensive and varied, Christendom being subdivided as we know, alas, into many sects. But whilst there are many and whilst there is variety, yet there is nothing in the accepted Christianity of the day that is properly new, nothing new in the sense in which this verse speaks of newness. I should say a fourth of the world's population has become Christianised. The Lord had directed the apostles to make disciples of all the nations, and what has happened is Christianisation of them which really means no change of heart in the

nations, characteristically, and there being no change of heart, however good their teaching may be in creeds or the like, there is nothing new in any sense in which these scriptures speak of newness. There are real Christians, of course, among them for God. There are myriads unknown to us not enjoying their privileges. Thus, of course, one makes allowances for them. I am speaking of the general profession. Hence in the last days the idea of newness in divine things is as imperative to be understood as it was at the beginning.

Christianity really is new, meaning that there was nothing like it before. There was nothing current like it before, neither when it was inaugurated, nor shall there be anything like it. And whilst public history shows that it returned to the ordinary, it took on the ordinary religious garb, the Lord has not lost sight of newness, and has wrought in our times to bring it to light. I mean newness in the sense in which it is spoken of in these verses.

The first is newness of life which includes in its application, being elementary, every young Christian here as well as every old Christian. That is what the scripture requires of every believer baptised according to this chapter; and what is in view is not only life but newness of life. God had the thought of life in mind in coming in to order things as we have in the creation. He reached the thought on the third day. But the idea was not newness. It was simply the question of vegetable life, but there is remarkable correspondence in the passages in the record of the third day in Genesis 1 and Romans 6, that is the third day brought out the emerging of the dry ground from the envelopment of waters that had hitherto covered the earth. There is remarkable correspondence, for the believer in Romans 6 has come out similarly. He has been under the waters of baptism and it is not only that there is baptism to Christ but

unto His death, and His death meant being engulfed. He went to the bottom of the mountains. Deep called unto deep as He was in death. The earth and the bars were round about Him, He says Jonah 2:6, Jonah being a figure, so that baptism is intended to be a real symbol for the Christian, that is, that he has been not only baptised unto Christ. Sprinkling might do for that in a way, but being baptised unto Christ's death requires more than sprinkling as a symbol. It requires immersion. That is to say that the believer in principle accepts that Christ's death was really intended to be his. Christ was immune from death. Death had no power over Him. He was the Author of life. He entered into death vicariously, and hence we understand that being baptised unto His death, that death was ours. It was a vicarious death but it was ours and it should be accepted in all its significance as Christ realised it. It was reality to Him. He tasted it. He tasted it in all its reality and it is for the believer to accept it in that sense, so that he comes out of it as the earth emerged by the commandment of God out of the envelopment of the waters, and it was required to bring forth grass and herbs and trees bearing fruit. The believer now has emerged intelligently out of the waters of death and it is that he should walk in newness of life. Romans contemplates us as the same individuals that went into death. It contemplates us here where we were, where we sinned, where we dishonoured God, and dishonoured man, dishonoured ourselves, dishonoured creation. In that very environment, in that very spot, there is to be something new.

Then we find another type in the deluge. The earth again emerged from the waters of death but with the added thought of the means of life, not vegetable life, but animal life and human life appearing in newness. That was the divine thought, dear brethren, that it should not be the same type of man that had caused

God grief. "Only evil the whole day" -- that was the experience the blessed God had in looking down from heaven before the deluge. He did not intend that to be resumed. He intended newness of life, a new order of things, at least figuratively, and so it was. Genesis 9 is beautifully fresh coming in after Genesis 8, in which we are told that Jehovah smelled a sweet savour, a savour of rest. There was some indication there for it is a question of divine experience. Let us not be afraid of the word 'experience' as applied to God, using it in a holy, reverent way. What an experience is depicted in Genesis 6 and now God would build on it so as to bring in another experience for Himself, and as He looks at anyone of us here tonight, what He has in mind is that He should have another experience, and that the believer should have another experience. Think of the life of God. Think of the joy He has found in man. Now Genesis 8 points to that, so beautifully set out on the banks of the Jordan. Jehovah smelled a sweet savour, a sweet savour of rest. God would have us to understand what He has in that incense, what experience He had in that odour of rest from the willing sacrifice, the intelligent sacrifice of Noah. And so He entered into the covenant. Chapter 9 is beautifully fresh in that sense. How God took man up would indicate what delight He was going to have in a new world. I am speaking of what stands out and what is realised now is that Christ has become man. I am not intimating for a moment that God did not know what would happen. But what a time was before God! What did He anticipate? He was going to have a time for Himself. Let us not overlook that. What a delight for God! There was to be a suitable state of things while earth remains, that there should be seed time and harvest, cold and heat, summer and winter, day and night. He was going to have a time for Himself. God's own affections entered into this

from the very outset. What a time He is going to have when the Head of the new system of things comes into power. God has blessed and is not repentant. The blessing stood, and it has come down through Shem, and not for one moment did God forget His line, the delight of His heart. It was only a matter of time. One day is as a thousand years and a thousand years as one day, 2 Peter 3:8. He was anticipating Jesus. There was the idea of a renewed earth and newness of life, and God entered into covenant with man. The power was there and the power remains fully realised in Jesus on the banks of the Jordan, and He entered into death there figuratively, a figure of righteousness pointing to His own death where it was tasted as He only could taste it. He tasted it vicariously for everything as we are told. Infinitude enters into that, that He could take account of everything knowing well the divine mind as to things and every person -- the hairs of our heads are even numbered, Matthew 10:30. What infinitude entered into that moment when the Lord Jesus entered into death. How calculated everything was. How perfectly and infinitely balanced were His mind and His affections as He entered into death. God was before Him. He spoke to Him as God on the cross. Man also was before Him, knowing all that was in man and all that he was in his guilt before God. All that and infinitely more was in the mind of our Saviour as He entered into death. How real it all was. The thought in this chapter is to bring us to that. How small in our minds we may be, being in the presence of the infinitude of the death of Jesus, as to all that entered into it, what death really was. The waters of baptism meant that. It is only a figure for us, but the more we clothe it with those thoughts the more we shall understand and profit by baptism.

So the thought is now that He was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father. What a thought

that is to be brought in. We have in the previous chapter the glory of God. We rejoice in hope of it. We have been saying together already today, God would cause the glory to enter into our minds, not exactly in our conversion when the light of the gospel comes to us first, but if the gospel is rightly presented, it will bring rays of glory into the souls of the listeners. It involves the gospel of the glory, what God is, and then further, it is the idea of the resurrection of Jesus, that is, what Jesus was to God consequent upon all this that I have been saying. "Therefore doth my Father love me, because I lay down my life, that I might take it again", John 10:17. What He was to His Father as He lay there in death! What experiences did God have during those three days and three nights! Did it ever enter into your mind that God had experience during those three days and three nights? What was it to Him? The object of His affections lay there in death. Was that nothing to Him? He did not lie there because of Himself. No, He died there vicariously. I want to say that the grave is as vicarious as the cross. God was deprived of Him. What experience was that? Think of what it was to God. Let us not think that God is any different to us in that respect. He has feelings and affections. What was it to Him to be deprived of His Beloved, the supreme, infinite Object of His heart during three days and nights? It was new experience for Him, and those pent-up feelings, holy affections waited the moment that was required. We may find it difficult to work out, but God worked it out perfectly during those three days and nights. It meant more to Him than it meant to any other. When the moment came those affections burst forth, the glory of the Father was there, power was there, but glory was there. How God would appeal to us by the idea of glory. He was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father. Think of what those affections were as deprived of

their object. Now the time had come when He could secure eternally those affections. The Father reached forth and took Him out of death in that sense. What did He die to secure? Disciples -- that there should be some continuation in us of that life that was so delightful to God. That is the idea.

So you can understand that when Phoebe from Cenchrea arrived at Rome with this letter they would read it. The whole assembly would come together in one place to read this letter from Paul. Many of them had not seen him. They were going to have a time, you may be sure. They would come together reverently and attentively and these pages would be read over, and they would say. What did this word 'newness' mean. Could Phoebe tell them? No doubt the letter was written in Greek, and would probably be translated into Latin as read in Rome, but you may be sure it was a matter of inquiry as to the meaning of this word 'newness'. And the sisters in the meeting would ask Phoebe about it too. You may be sure that Phoebe would tell them what she knew about the word 'newness' from her acquaintance with the great servant. She had a letter of commendation from the apostle. You may be sure that the brethren would enquire from her, too, and they would say, Well, it is certainly not the kind of life that is led here in Rome. There were some of them in the Palace, at least in later years, and doubtless there were then. The palace life was known and what a life! The senatorial life was known. The military, too, was known, and what a life! There was nothing new about these features of life. There were no features of Christ about them -- nothing new in them, nothing new at all. There were those who attended the shows, a word which has acquired great significance in modern days referring to theatres and cinemas and the like. These had a great place in the ordinary conversation of the Romans, and

Christians would say, 'It cannot mean that'. There is nothing new in these things, nothing new at all. Christians there in Rome would have to come to the conclusion, as doubtless they did, that newness of life meant the kind of life that shone in Jesus as here upon earth -- that kind of life! There is another wonderful type of this chapter, that is Exodus 15, Exodus 16, Exodus 17, when the Israelites came out of Egypt where their tastes had been very much like the Egyptians' tastes. In the wilderness they thought of them. They relished the garlic and onions and flesh and fish and cucumbers. They did not lose their relish for those strong savouries. But we are told that the waters they found after they crossed the Red Sea were brackish. They were unpalatable. The young Christian finds that although he has found a little relief in the gospel there are things brethren are going on with that are not just to his liking, not just palatable. You would rather be somewhere else, maybe, than here. Things are not just palatable, and what happened was that Moses himself could not meet the situation. He had had to do with Egypt, too, in his early days for forty years. He had had to do with the fleshpots of Egypt. No doubt he drank deeply into the pleasures of Egypt, pleasures of sin, but he chose other things besides. He chose "rather to suffer affliction with the people of God, than to enjoy the pleasures of sin for a season", Hebrews 11:25. It was a choice according to God, but in the wilderness he did not know how to meet this matter. There was the brackish water and he did not know how to meet it, and God had to show him. There is this principle of being shown and if you young Christians keep with the brethren you will be shown. Moses was shown. The Lord showed him the wood. Some say it was the cross. Though it does mean the cross, it means Christ. It was a new kind of thing. It means that He was in death Himself. It means that He tasted

death, and the believer says, 'if He tasted it, He has done everything for me'. The fact that He has been into death has changed it. In the next chapter you get the manna. What is it? The people did not know what it was. It was new. Nobody could understand the meaning. All the learning of Rome and of Greece could not instruct them as to the meaning of the manna, as to what it means spiritually -- the life of Jesus here upon the earth -- what that was, and that is the idea for you young believers to get hold of, that the thing is entirely new. A small round thing like a coriander seed came down at a certain time in the morning and there it lay on the desert. What is it? The Holy Spirit will tell you. Nobody gets on in Christianity who does not question. You will get answers as soon as you question. The Spirit of God is here to answer every spiritual question that rises in believers' hearts, so that you will get to understand what this new thing is, what the life of Jesus is. He has been into every circumstance that any one of us can be in, sin apart, and we have to understand what that means, how we can live outside those things I have been speaking of in the city of Rome, court life, senatorial life, the sports that were current, and the thousands of other things that people go in for. How will you get on without them? Let every young person ask himself before God. You will find you will get on without them. What are these Christians living on? There is no music, nothing to attract people, not a thing. Nothing to attract the flesh. That is the idea. What is it? Have you not found it? Nearly everybody here has found it. What is this new thing? It is Christ. He is the hidden manna. But nevertheless the same Christ that was here and could be seen at any time in Palestine in those years of His wonderful ministry, for it is said that he not only took a bondman's form but took His place in the likeness of men, Philippians 2:7. You would

see a wonderful Man. Others would see nothing but a carpenter. The spiritual eye could see the manna. What was there? Something new that had never been before. That is the idea in the wilderness, that we might walk, not merely attend the meetings. We do breathe life and enjoy it together, of course, but walking is a bond that we might walk in newness of life. God sees that His people are sustained by other things than what are current in this world. Much more might be said about them.

Now I come to the thought of newness of service, that we might serve in newness of spirit. That becomes very practical, dear brethren, and the Lord puts great stress on the idea of the service of God at the present time, and there is always a tendency to drop to the level of what is current in service. Young people always enquire at the outset when light begins to dawn on them, 'Why have we not got this and that?' What you need is this seventh chapter of Romans. Newness of life is more general. The whole public life, the ordinary life of the Christian is new in principle and the heart of God is delighted with it. Would that we could take that in -- the experience with God, not only our experience with Him but His experience with us. The chapter is a struggle. It is a struggle till the day dawns and the believer says, "I thank God through Jesus Christ our Lord. So then with the mind I myself serve the law of God", Romans 7:25. That is the idea of newness of service -- serving in newness of spirit here. It works out in our assembly meetings, that we do not drop down into the letter, and it is very common, you know. We slip into it very readily without discerning it, sitting down just in a religious way, leaving our houses in a religious way to attend the meetings and sitting down in a religious way. It is all the letter or very largely so. That is what this chapter would check, so that we should keep in mind that those who serve should do

so in lowliness, in entire freedom from legality, in a reverential way in the presence of God -- serving in newness of spirit, what God has before Him -- not in the oldness of the letter. Under this heading it is to be understood that the hymn book is not a prayer book. It is not what a prayer is in current religion. It is something that is to be used in the spirit. It is a question of the spirit, what the spirit of worship is to be. So we do not make beaten tracks in the hymn book. What I mean is that the hymn book that God has provided, as we believe He has, is to be used in the spirit. "I will sing with the spirit and with the understanding", meaning that I have a spirit, I have something that is in agreement with God, something by which I am in touch with God, and that is brought into gain governed by my understanding, so that in assembly I am in relation to God consciously, not seeking to serve in the letter but in the spirit. All that is done is done as controlled by the renewed mind. That is the next 'new'. The mind is brought in at the end of the chapter. There it is the dominant thought, "I myself with the mind". I am now coming on in the epistle to the idea of serving God, and the mind is dominant. It is a great thing to get into a scriptural way of thinking and the place it gives this great faculty that God has given to us in His service so that we should be set in the assembly, that we should be able to sit steadily controlled by the mind. We know what to do so that we are not carried about by our feelings. We know what governs us and what to do.

"I myself with the mind serve the law of God". Then it leads on. Chapter 8 is full of the Holy Spirit. The thought is that the soul becomes bathed in the Holy Spirit in Romans 8. Chapters 6 and 7 really set us up on mount Sinai in type, where we serve God. They were to serve God on that mount. It is the same thing only in newness of spirit, not in oldness

of letter, and then the mind is dominant. The wonderful faculty God has provided for man has not changed, as it were, and chapter 12 shows that it is renewed. It is a new kind of mind. That enters into the holy position in the wilderness. I have taken up an attitude of serving God in His mountain and I am to do it in newness of spirit and I am to be controlled by the mind.

Now I come to the idea of sacrifice. There is no real service of God apart from sacrifice. There is the great sacrifice of Christ and in those who serve that great thought is to be reproduced. Chapter 12 brings in the idea of sacrifice so that it is to present our bodies "a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable unto God, which is your intelligent service", Romans 12:1. We are not to be conformed to this world. We have to be transformed. It is a real change by the renewing of the mind. That is another thing. The renewing of the mind is a process that is effected by the Spirit. It is going on all the time. Let us subject our minds, dear brethren, to the Spirit. The Spirit takes charge of the mind. It is dominant in Romans 7 but the Holy Spirit takes charge of the situation in chapter 8. The believer is a sort of institution and the Holy Spirit is in charge of each one. What a chapter it is. Chapters 9, 10 and 11 are prophetical. Chapter 8 properly links up with chapter 12. The believer bathed in the thought of the Spirit of God is brought to this that he is to be transformed by another instrumentality. That is the renewing of the mind. This is to be understood. The texture of one's mind is changed and it is a totally new mind. The greatest minds, the greatest individuals are not able to understand for a moment that renewed mind. They simply cannot. It is beyond them. Let there be no attempt at all to get down to the level of man's intellect. It is something altogether new. It is to enter into the service of God in the sense of sacrifice. It sees at once that sacrifice

is essential to the service of God so that the body which every believer has is a means of sacrifice and is far more important in God's eye than millions of money. God needs Christians endued by the Spirit of God and indwelt by the Spirit and in this sense there is a new state of things in us. The body is available and presented living. One might say that in chapter 8 it says it is dead. So it is, but only in a moral sense. The body is dead because of sin. It becomes a corpse in the mind of the believer, no longer to be a vehicle for the expression of the mind of the flesh. In chapter 12 it begins with what is living -- every member vitalised by the blessed presence of the Spirit of God and so presented to God. Think of one's body being capable of being presented to God, not what it has been, but what it is through the redemptive work of Christ, that it can be presented to God, a living sacrifice, and it is by this principle of the renewal of the mind that we prove what is the good and acceptable and perfect will of God. I am perfectly clear of the wilderness, no longer complaining, but restful and satisfied. I see that every item of the will of God is good, proving it. It is a wonderful thing to find it is in the Scriptures -- another thing to prove it, to prove what is the good and acceptable and perfect will of God; and now this is the great thought of newness. It is something entirely new and different from what is current in every religion. It is what God is looking for, as I said before of the book of Revelation, what God is looking for in these last days.

May God bless His word.

ASSEMBLY SERVICES

1 Corinthians 5:3 - 5; 1 Corinthians 11:17 - 22; 1 Corinthians 14:23 - 25; 2 Corinthians 8:23, 24

J.T. What is in mind is to show the services in which the assembly is employed by God as seen in these epistles, that is, as in the Pauline ordering, involving subdivisions of the assembly or, in other words, local assemblies so-called. The assembly is to be used in the future, as we all know, in a great and universal way as one unit. It is seen coming down from God out of heaven in immense proportions representing the full divine thought in the sense of administrative services, but at the present time the administrative services of the assembly are in various localities. Each assembly is constituted to act for God, not independently of the others, but still to act authoritatively for God so as to be representative of Him in what is needed during this period of testimony.

In the scriptures read the first service executed by the assembly is that of discipline, the second is celebrating the Lord's supper, then prophetic ministry and then in connection with the administration of the bounty of the saints in material things. These and other services are maintained in the way of testimony in the assembly. The apostle presents the assembly to us in both epistles as the assembly of God in Corinth; that is, the assembly of God in any city or town or place as representative of Him; it is that which He has in view of these needed administrative services. That is what is in mind at this time.

R.S.T. All these services are carried out on an equally high level. You were saying that the assembly is representative of God in a city.

J.T. That is a very important side of the matter. Assembly functioning therefore would exclude all

that would be unsuitable to the anointing, and all such activities or administrative services are in the dignity of the anointing.

H.W. Are they intended to set forth something of God here?

J.T. I think that is obvious. It ought to be before us in coming together in assembly for any of these services that we are representative of God. Sometimes assembly meetings, so-called, lose their dignity and character because of the introduction of discussion and deliberation and investigation. The assembly is for administration and whatever service it may render it does it in the dignity of the anointing.

H.W. Recognition of that would help us to see the importance of the place the Spirit is given at the beginning of this epistle. The whole of the second chapter is mainly taken up with the Spirit.

J.T. Quite so. The apostle had led the way in that, because he shows that his services were by the Spirit, as he says, "And my word and my preaching, not in persuasive words of wisdom, but in demonstration of the Spirit and of power", 1 Corinthians 2:4

P.D. Do you distinguish between coming together in assembly and the whole assembly coming together in one place?

J.T. Yes. The whole assembly coming together in one place is not exactly that it should function in a collective sense, but that it should afford a suitable sphere for prophetic ministry or ministry by the Spirit, so that the point is "the whole assembly", that is, all the saints in the place, so that God has full strength, as it were, in what is on hand, whereas a subdivision in a locality would come together in assembly to partake of the Lord's supper according to 1 Corinthians 11. It is not the assembly but the character of the gathering as in assembly.

Rem. An assembly meeting for discipline would

necessitate all the saints being together from the various subdivisions, would it not?

J.T. That is what I would understand. In the verses read he was writing to the whole assembly and saying, "Ye and my spirit being gathered together". I would take the 'ye' there to imply all, but as gathered together the word 'assembly' is not brought in but it is clearly implied. Is that your thought?

Rem. Yes. I wondered whether you would say more as to the fact that it is not intended to be a deliberative meeting where discussions take place. All the facts would be thoroughly sifted and arrived at before the assembly meeting was called.

J.T. Yes. So that a mere precise statement of the established facts is all that is needed for the assembly's conscience. The assembly will accept testimony. The whole tenor of Scripture is that it should. It accepts accredited testimony and acts accordingly.

Rem. So that any action that follows the establishment of the matter in the mouth of two or three witnesses becomes authoritative and binding.

J.T. That is what Matthew 18 clearly sets out and it is set out here, too, and later Paul alludes directly to that and to Deuteronomy which lays down as basic in regard to disciplinary matters that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word is established. It makes the position clear and dignified as accredited testimony is presented by those who have examined into the matter. The assembly acts on that.

E.S.H. Would you say something about "with the power of our Lord Jesus Christ"?

J.T. That comes in if the brethren are all clear as to the position established in 'ye', that is, the saints coming together. "Ye and my spirit being gathered together, with the power of our Lord Jesus Christ". These elements are the saints and Paul's spirit and the power of our Lord Jesus Christ. It is a very strong position, an irresistible one, one implying

judgment that would be effective, for that is what is in mind. A person is to be delivered to Satan. Not that we would apply that in any literal way now but still the principle enters into all discipline. There is an act of God through this instrumentality.

C.S.S. Does coming together in assembly suggest that the individual side is lost sight of entirely?

J.T. You mean the individuals forming the assembly? Yes, it is a collective thought. Matthew 18 would show that it is very authoritative and dignified. "Tell it to the assembly; and if also he will not listen to the assembly ...", Matthew 18:17. All that is collective.

F.I. Judgment arrived at can only be arrived at in the assembly, not by the respective witnesses. Witnesses bring their evidence which would enable the conscience of the assembly to come to a judgment. It is the assembly that comes to a judgment.

J.T. That is right; that is how the thing stands. Judgment is by the assembly.

H.W. Why does the apostle say "and my spirit"? Why not just "the power of the Lord"?

J.T. I suppose the allusion to Paul's spirit in this way would imply the organism underlying all assembly services, but the local assembly acts in relation to what is elsewhere, and in the measure in which the action is known there is support for it. These epistles provide for the general fellowship as well as the local fellowship. A local action is really an action of the whole assembly in principle and carries with it what there is on earth. I think it enlarges the position, bringing into it what God has. Paul's spirit, of course, would be special, being who he was and having been used to gather and convert the saints at Corinth, but still he represents what there is in a general way.

H.W. I wondered if in our day it would involve that we come together in the light of the apostle's teaching as governed by it.

J.T. That is good, too. It is his spirit. All that a man is would enter into what his spirit is. It alludes, I think, to the organism and the possibility of the Spirit being there.

P.D. Would the spirits of just men enter into it?

J.T. In the sense that Paul was one? Yes, quite so. The spirit of any just man on earth would be with an action such as is contemplated here.

H.W. That would teach us it would be a very serious thing to be out of accord with such a judgment.

J.T. Indeed. It does away with local independency.

S.W. Would such a judgment be based upon and supported by a specific scripture?

J.T. Scripture may be brought in, and ought to be. No judgment, I am sure, should be publicly announced without the direct authority of Scripture or it may be invalid, because after all we may come together and make mistakes. It brings out, I think, the delicacy of the matter, that the organism underlies it, that is, Paul's spirit representing the organism. His spirit could be present although he was not there laterally and bodily. Of course, the Lord was there. "The power of our Lord Jesus Christ". So that the position is extremely delicate and solemn and I believe it should impress us with the need of being there in the recognition of the organism and that no element should be active other than operates in the organism normally.

F.W.W. That is what you meant just now when you spoke of the Pauline assemblies. Does it take character from Paul?

J.T. Yes, they are contemplated in these epistles as directly his.

F.W.W. I thought so. That is the basis upon which we move today.

J.T. Quite so. It is that or it is nothing. We are moving in the light of these things now in any cases

of discipline. It is very solemn, so that we should be impressed with the need of righteousness to the exclusion of all other elements because that enters into the holiness of God's house.

P.D. They that are spiritual are to recognise that what he says is the commandment of the Lord.

J.T. That is right, and they will, too.

R.S.T. What is involved in the expression "for I ... have already judged?"

J.T. That, of course, is apostolic. He accepted the testimony that came to him as true. Ordinarily we might say, How did he know? But he is an apostle and was used of the Lord to set up this economy. He understood its workings perfectly. He himself knew by the testimony presented that the facts were as he stated here for he sets down the facts himself. What he says here should be followed in any case of discipline. The facts are very clearly stated in verses 1 and 2, and it is a good example, too, for he is very brief in what he says and yet it is a most heinous sort of thing, a terrible crime. He will not admit of any controversy about it in the assembly; it is there.

S.W. Is it not important that he did not judge as at a distance, but as present in spirit?

J.T. Quite so, very good.

N.K.McL. Would you say a word as to the bearing of the day of the Lord Jesus upon assembly discipline?

J.T. It refers to the judgment. The word 'day' would be suggestive of the time when everything is manifest and clear. Other things would enter into the day of the Lord's coming, but 'the day' would imply perfect clarity as to everything and judgment in it, too. What would you say yourself?

N.K.McL. I wondered whether the bearing would be that the rights of the Lord had been infringed in the assembly and everything would come out in

connection with those rights in the day of the Lord Jesus.

J.T. The man is fit for that day. He is cleared through discipline. It is to bring out the service which discipline renders to a person disciplined. It constitutes him fit for the day of the Lord Jesus, that is, that his spirit should be saved. He would therefore, as we see in the next epistle, as the flesh is destroyed, be ready for restoration. It is complete destruction of the flesh that is in mind, Satan being employed. It is a remarkable state of things. Satan is brought into it.

Rem. He is made to serve God's end.

J.T. Just so. He is fit for the day of the Lord Jesus. His spirit is saved. It is a very striking statement of what discipline may effect. This is an outstanding case, but still it is the principle of all discipline, that it is not punitive, although Paul does use punitive expressions, but still it is not to destroy the man but to destroy the flesh, to do the best service that could be rendered to him at the time.

F.W.W. Would Job be an example of this?

J.T. The book of Job is intended to unfold to us the principles governing discipline and the end of the Lord. How completely Job was saved in his spirit and personally, too!

F.W.W. Satan was used as the tool, was he not?

J.T. Jehovah would have Job come under discipline in this way, and Satan was ready, showing that although he would damage the assembly, as there, God would use him. It is a very fine testimony to the supremacy of God in all circumstances, and that supremacy is what belongs to the assembly, too, over all circumstances, that even Satan, although near us, may be turned to good account.

H.W. "That the spirit may be saved", is the object of all this.

J.T. That is what is stated, "... him that hath so

wrought this: to deliver him, I say, being such, to Satan for the destruction of the flesh", 1 Corinthians 5:4,5. There is no admission of any possibility of it being wrong, because it is "being such". First we read "him that hath so wrought this", and again "being such". The matter is definitely so. There is no question about it that it is so.

Rem. And the witness should be able to state that it is so.

J.T. That is the idea exactly, so that every conscience is carried that it is so.

Rem. In point of practice, you would expect the brother who would be voicing the judgment of the assembly to refer to a scripture that would name the thing as God saw it.

J.T. I am sure that is a right and convicting procedure. It is a definite statement of the facts. The use of Scripture to confirm and guide is certainly to be desired, and should be followed, too.

Ques. Would you think it necessary that the facts should be corroborated by a second brother?

J.T. I think it might, but that brings in another matter, that is of confidence. No doubt one should state the facts and another corroborate them, but confidence would accept that the findings stated by the one brother had come from the brethren who had investigated the matter, because they would be all there and silence would give consent, but the less cumbersome the better these things are. There is no need for formalities. If the statement is made plainly, the conscience is carried. All the brethren who investigated the matter would be there, and there would be no doubt about it. But still two witnesses would be right.

F.W.W. Is it important to keep the organism in view?

J.T. I think it is. The brothers and sisters present are all in the thing and have already learnt how

to hold themselves bodywise, not as so many units present but they are present bodywise. That comes out more in the Lord's supper but still the organism must be present in the assembly services, even in discipline.

C.S.S. Would you say another word with regard to "the power of our Lord Jesus Christ?" This is God's assembly, is it not? It is not exactly the power of God that we have in Ephesians, for instance. Twice he mentions "our Lord Jesus Christ".

J.T. It is the power of God used mediatorially. The Lord is given His full title in connection with the execution of such matters, implying that they are all in his hands. I think that is about all it could be, to bring in the authority of Christ, for that is most important. The apostle himself represented that.

N.B.S. Would you think if we were under the hand of the Lord that two or three scriptures would be all that is required on the line of a prophetic word from the Lord to deal with the matter? Sometimes we have a large number of scriptures.

J.T. As far as I know generally disciplinary affairs and judgments are made unduly cumbersome. Scripture of course, is always Scripture, but this chapter deals with a very outstanding matter in eight verses. I am not saying that these verses should not be amplified in their application but brevity and dignity, I think, should mark disciplinary matters. What do you say yourself?

N.B.S. I want help. If we are together in dependence on the Lord He would give the needed word as you say, in brevity, and sometimes the multiplicity of scriptures referred to does not conduce to help in the matter.

F.I. Going back a bit, in regard to the organism, you do not view the organism as confined to the local company but the local company as moving in view of the whole assembly.

J.T. Yes, only that the thought of the organism is applied to the local assembly, too, but without the article preceding it. "Ye are Christ's body", that is, they were that in character and that brings the thing in specially to that local position, whilst including by extension the whole assembly on earth, and I think Paul's spirit being present would suggest that it is well to keep that in mind.

F.I. I was thinking that. One was feeling that in the judgment come to in a local assembly it should be in view that it should be a judgment which should be accredited by the whole assembly universally.

J.T. Yes, you can see how the rendering of authoritative decisions by brothers alone is contrary to Scripture.

H.W. I wondered if you would go on to that. Do you mean in the care meeting?

J.T. Yes.

H.W. You spoke about the organism being more distinctly connected with the celebration of the Lord's supper.

J.T. It comes in there and we are formally said to be one body in 1 Corinthians 10. I think it can be readily understood that the features of the assembly itself would come into more evidence when we come to the celebration of the Lord's supper than it would in 1 Corinthians 5 which stresses their being gathered together without mentioning the body. "For I, as absent in body but present in spirit, have already judged ..." and then "ye and my spirit being gathered together, with the power of our Lord Jesus Christ". It is a question of accuracy and established facts and power in chapter 5 but in 1 Corinthians 11, beginning indeed with 1 Corinthians 10:15, we get the organism produced; it is represented in the bread. It is a very touching thing that we should correspond with the bread which is the Lord's body, so that it would be a love matter as permeating the saints.

P.D. Would you connect the thought of organism with the body as seen in the loaf?

J.T. Well, it is stated in connection with the loaf, "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", 1 Corinthians 10:17 That is what I was alluding to. It is very elementary and, in the service that attaches to it, whilst we may have all the light of Scripture as to the body in our minds, we should confine ourselves to what is applicable at that particular time in the service, not bring in all that relates to the body which Colossians and Ephesians teach, but confine ourselves to what is applicable at that time. It bears on what we are as together, whether we are there bodywise. It does not say we are the body of Christ; it is one body. It is the idea of unity and affection; although we are many we are one body.

H.W. Is that the prominent thought in your mind when you speak about the assembly of God being here in testimony with regard to these various features, that there is the setting forth of Christ here in connection with the Lord's supper?

J.T. Yes. I thought these two chapters show how this great service, perhaps the greatest of all the services rendered by the assembly here on earth, is the service of the celebration of the Lord's supper. The apostle formally detaches the Lord's supper from the houses of the saints. Evidently it had been attached to them according to Acts 2, but now it is in the assembly. "When ye come therefore together into one place, it is not to eat the Lord's supper". It means that their conduct excluded the Lord's supper, but normally it should have been to eat the Lord's supper.

Ques. Is there anything more than party spirit that would interfere with that? It is the great way in which that service would be interrupted by the

introduction of what is divisional amongst the saints.

J.T. It seems to be the leading thought in what the apostle says. It is more than what is said in 1 Corinthians 1:12 -- "I am of Paul, and I of Apollos, and I of Cephas". It is more than that here; it is that greatly accentuated. They actually carried divisions and partisan feelings into the assembly. It is more serious because he says, "when ye come therefore together into one place, it is not to eat the Lord's supper. For each one in eating takes his own supper before others, and one is hungry and another drinks to excess. Have ye not then houses for eating and drinking? Or do ye despise the assembly of God, and put to shame them who have not?" It would seem that they were eating in coteries together as professedly gathered in assembly and thus nullifying what they professed to do. It was not the Lord's supper. They were eating in companies and the poor ones who had no houses or no means were left out. It was distressing. You marvel at the length to which partisan feeling can go.

Rem. It may extend to this if it is not judged earlier.

J.T. Just so. It will be carried into the assembly in some way or other, and in that sense will nullify what we come together for, so that we may come together and fail in the object for which we come together.

F.W.W. Would the partisan spirit, the independent spirit, break up the feature of the organism?

J.T. Clearly so. It is the sphere of the devil where persons are eating in several coteries and others not. He has a place in such a condition. They were despising the assembly of God, although the apostle does not say so here.

H.W. Whilst we are sitting down together in one circle are we in danger of doing this in a spiritual way

and there being divisions or discord amongst the saints?

J.T. Yes, we may not be sitting in companies but inwardly we may be just as divided and even carry feelings of animosity into the assembly.

Ques. Would the allowance of that deprive us of the Lord's presence with us?

J.T. It does. It breaks up the organism and, of course, there is evil in it, too; there is leaven in it. So that we are enjoined to purge out the old leaven, whatever it may be. There is no time to enlarge on any of these subjects but only to bring out how they all fit into the assembly. The matter of prophetic ministry is the next service rendered. The assembly becomes the sphere of it, but it is the whole assembly in a place. "If therefore the whole assembly come together in one place ..."

Ques. Do you mean that the success of prophetic meetings is not only dependent upon the presence of the prophets but the saints together in that character?

J.T. That is a good way to put it and a very important way. It ought to appeal to us to be present at such a meeting; everyone should be present; the more there are the greater the power.

H.W. That would show the importance of the opening verses -- "Follow after love". Love is to be seen actively working amongst the saints.

J.T. In touching the matter of gift in chapter 12 he says, "... and yet show I unto you a way of more surpassing excellence". So that the saints themselves are greater than the gift or gifts present. The way of surpassing excellence is in the saints. It is not a question in that statement of the gifts but of the whole assembly. The whole assembly is a sphere of love -- the way of surpassing excellence. Think of what it is to God when we all come together actuated by love -- the more excellent way. What a sphere there is for gift, how much liberty there is, and the

Spirit of God can unfold the mind of God to the gifts.

P.D. Spiritual conditions amongst the saints would make way for the prophetic word.

J.T. Clearly, it involves all the saints according to Acts 2:1, "they were all together in one place". They were there of one accord and the Spirit came in as if to honour that and that should be in our minds in an assembly meeting.

E.L.G. Does "all together in one place" provide a better atmosphere for a prophetic word than coming together in separate subdivisions?

J.T. I am sure it is so. Whatever proportion a city may take on God has his best in all the saints together. That is what He has in the way of public testimony here, and the way that love is brought in in these chapters as making way for gift is very striking. It is delightful to heaven to see the saints all together and in the more excellent way, and way of surpassing excellence, that is, the way of love.

H.W. The working of this organism that you spoke of is greatly hampered on account of the conditions we are found in. I was wondering how it worked in these broken days.

J.T. Broken conditions, of course, interfere. We cannot get all the saints in Adelaide together, nor in any town or city in the world, and hence God has not His best in our meetings now, but still He recognises what there is and according to the Scriptures all Israel that are present come in for things only they are in lesser power because the Lord says to Philadelphia, "Thou hast a little power".

C.S.S. Does it take in the recognition of what God has set in the assembly?

J.T. That is the idea. Chapter 12 shows that God has set gifts in the assembly; chapters 13 and 14 are to bring out the love. That is the great thing. Love abides and goes through. "And the greater of these is love", 1 Corinthians 13:13. It is called the way of surpassing

excellence. What a thought that is -- that we can furnish that under God's eye in any town! That is the way of love, and then the gifts have scope. Of course the gifts themselves may be hampered in themselves as to who should take part, but what is in mind in the end of chapters 12 and 13 is the way of love which includes all the saints.

Ques. Does the effect of prophetic ministry depend on what has gone before in connection with discipline and in connection with the breaking of bread?

J.T. I think these things are in their order. If discipline is not attended to and the breaking of bread is not maintained in its true sense, then we cannot expect a ministry according to this chapter. We cannot expect the way of surpassing excellence.

J.P.Sr. You spoke of chapter 11 as representing the unity and affection. Would this bring in unity and dependence as to God's mind for His people in this city?

J.T. Very good, that is just what I would say. Love makes the way for it, love in all the saints. I am sure we should pay attention to that. The whole assembly come together in one place and love being there, there is an opportunity for the Spirit to unfold the mind of God. It is a question of intelligence.

Rem. Where those conditions existed you would expect the Spirit of God to come upon a prophet.

J.T. You would. To go back to Acts 2, the standard is that all the saints are there. You say, it is one hundred and twenty; there may have been others. We do not know, but they were all there; they were there of one accord and in one place; then heaven began to move. They heard a sound. It is fine when you hear a rustling among the brethren. You feel in your spirit that something is going to be said; everyone is aglow and you do hear something because the Holy Spirit has scope. The right conditions are there.

Rem. It is set forth prophetically in many a scripture, but we see in 2 Chronicles 20 how Jehoshaphat called a fast and it says "all Judah stood before the Lord ... Then ... came the Spirit of the Lord in the midst of the congregation; and he said, Hearken ye, all Judah", 2 Chronicles 20:15. In principle you would expect that in a prophetic meeting.

J.T. Very good indeed, for "all Judah" there would be the whole kingdom. Many stay at home for a trifle, you know, but really they are interfering with this matter; they are interfering with the organism and they are not functioning when they are not there.

H.W. Many, alas, only look upon the assembly as a place of the celebration of the Lord's supper and do not consider these other important aspects.

J.T. No.

E.W.C. How frequent should such meetings be? Weekly or monthly?

J.T. As far as my experience goes, monthly, and God seems to honour them and they are not allowed to displace other meetings. They ought to be additional to other meetings.

E.K. Are they connected with the thought of the new moon? It says, "Blow up the trumpet in the new moon", Psalm 81:3. Would that suggest that there should be a distinctive note in the meeting for ministry?

J.T. Yes, but it is just a question of the word 'month'; it does not enter into church economy. I think it is properly Jewish, Israelitish. Ours is the weekly. The scope for the services seems to include the week. That is John 20 would show that the Lord came in on the first day of the week and came in eight days afterwards. What intervened would be the development of what came out of the first incoming of Christ, and then there is another incoming a week afterwards and that seems to set up the principle governing our dispensation. But the month and the new moon are Jewish so that making it monthly

would be more a matter of convenience, I think. The Lord recognises what we do; He is with us in what we do. "I am with you all the days", He says, Matthew 28:20. If we come together, if it is convenient, for an additional meeting in a month, the Lord is with us in that. I am not ignoring what you say as to the new moon, but strictly it is an Israelitish symbol, I think. The remnant of Israel which had once been lost to view has come back again.

Ques. Do you mean that it is a matter of wisdom rather than principle?

J.T. I think it is a matter of wisdom, the Lord leaving these things to us. He does not tell us to have a reading on Wednesday and a prayer meeting on Monday; He leaves these things. There is latitude in that way in our services.

Rem. So that if we are not wilful we will soon find what God honours and supports amongst the saints.

J.T. That is just it. One has often suggested that our procedure at such a meeting as this and other meetings may not exactly correspond with what they did at the beginning but the Lord is manifestly with the brethren and they are not out of keeping with what is mentioned at the beginning. Whether the meetings then took the same form, I do not know. It would be questionable.

C.S.S. Do you suggest that all localities should be alive to this matter of coming together in one place for these meetings? Sometimes there does not seem the power for it.

J.T. The power is supposed to be when they come together. It is when we come together that power is realised. In truth it is a matter of faith. The Lord says, "According to your faith be it unto you", Matthew 9:29

N.B.S. I was going to enquire the difference between "whenever ye come together" in 1 Corinthians 14:26 and "if then the whole assembly come together" in 1 Corinthians 14:23.

J.T. I think the "if" in verse 23 bears out what we were saying. It is left open, as if the Lord would say, 'If you do it, whenever you do it I am with you'. Then verse 26 is enlarging on the matter as to the procedure. "What is it then, brethren? whenever ye come together". There again it is "whenever". It is not a stated time like a weekly meeting. He indicates the order in which the service is to be carried on. But in chapter 11 it says, "when ye come together in assembly". It is not 'if' but "when" as if it were a definite thing and practice; that he is dealing with a definite thing that went on amongst them. The "if" and the "whenever", I think, suggest a little more openness and elasticity as regards this meeting than what we have stated as regards the Lord's supper. What do you say yourself?

N.B.S. I thought that. But I wondered if "whenever" left it open where the whole assembly together in one place is in view.

J.T. We can only act in the light of these things, as we always say, but the Lord is with us. What can anyone say if the Lord is with us? And every Christian sensitive in the organism knows when He is there. That is one of the features of the organism that you discern that He is with us.

J.P.Sr. We would delight to come together for such occasions to know the presence of God amongst us.

J.T. Just so. It is a question of God at His strength, so to speak, in this passage, that He has got the full strength of what He has in the place under His hand and hence the great results in the ministry of prophecy.

F.I. Do you think that a meeting like this would be helpful in times of crisis or difficulty amongst us locally?

J.T. Very much so. 1 Samuel 19 brings that out most strikingly. It was a time of great crisis because

Saul was endeavouring to slay David -- a terrible state of things. Jonathon saves David and Michael saves David, but then this final attack seems to be irresistible. Saul sends messengers to where David was and when they come, instead of taking David they find the prophets prophesying under the presidency of Samuel. It is the full thought of the thing, and the messengers come under the power of ministry and they do not attack David. Other messengers of Saul come and the same thing happens. It is the power of ministry. Finally Saul himself comes and the same thing happens. That brings out in a most striking manner what prophecy is as meeting a crisis. The enemy is completely defeated.

S.W. Prophetic ministry is not limited to a meeting of this character.

J.T. Indeed no, but it ought to enter into a meeting like this.

Ques. Would we get a greater sense that God is for us in prophetic ministry?

J.T. Yes. You can see how the assembly would be established at Corinth in occurrences like this -- the occurrences that are described in verses 24 and 25. "But if all prophesy, and some unbeliever or simple person come in, he is convicted of all, he is judged of all; the secrets of his heart are manifested; and thus, falling upon his face, he will do homage to God, reporting that God is indeed amongst you", 1 Corinthians 14:24 - 25. It is said of that man that he reports things and he falls down and worships God which is the great thought. It secures the worship of God, but then he reports things. You can understand how he would go home to his house and say, I have a wonderful experience today. I have never been in a company like that. I have been in the Jewish synagogue and the idol house but I went into the Christian assembly today and it was a wonderful time. That is what God has. And that man comes into the benefit of what God

has, and now he is reporting it, so that the assembly is enhanced immensely by the power of God expressed in prophetic ministry.

E.B. Is this really the answer to the first chapter in regard to God's assembly? It is the testimony rendered now and God is indeed there.

J.T. Quite so. "That God is indeed amongst you". The man is convicted and would tell the truth.

E.B. All these matters cause us great exercise at the present moment in view of making room for God to come in, which He desires. Every one of us should be greatly concerned to provide these occasions for divine Persons to operate.

J.T. That is the point, that all were present, the whole assembly, and then all prophesying. The idea of prophecy is to be in our minds, not simply teaching, but prophesying.

Ques. Does it mean that every brother should learn to hold himself available on such an occasion?

J.T. That I think is what is in mind, so that you have in the procedure described, that if one is speaking something may be revealed to another sitting by and the one that is speaking is to know that and that brings out that the organism underlies this, the sensitiveness by which we discern that another has something from God and you sit down immediately to make room for that other.

E.W.C. What would be the character of what is prophetic in such a meeting as that?

J.T. The effect of it on the soul of this man we read about is that he is convicted of all. That is, all that are present are brought into the conviction. It is a collective matter and he is judged of all; they are brought into it. And then the secrets of his heart are manifested and thus falling upon his face he will do homage to God, reporting that God is indeed amongst you. That, I think, illustrates what the prophetic ministry is. It is bringing God to his

conscience so that he worships God as convicted of sin. But all the others convicted him, too; they are all in it.

N.K.McL. That would include brothers and sisters as well.

J.T. Yes, it is the whole assembly.

F.I. Would you say that although you may get prophetic ministry in our comings together generally, yet in normal conditions there will be more power in a meeting of this description of which we are speaking?

J.T. That is evidently what God had in mind, to bring out what He had in Corinth as over against all else that was there. God was in the assembly and here is a man completely secured for God. He is securing men for Himself and they are worshippers to worship God.

F.I. That is, the meeting primarily is not for the man but for believers. As the result of the prophetic word it showed the power there was there by the man being brought under conviction.

J.T. I should say that every person present would feel the thing that brought that man to confess his secrets, that every person present would also be searched by the same thing. The others had judged themselves normally but this man had not till now. He is convicted of all and judged of all, which means that we are all judged by the same ministry. You say, It searched my soul; I understand that man because it searched my soul. That is the idea. God comes to us in prophecy and searches the secrets of our hearts like the woman in John 4:29, who said, "He told me all things that ever I did". That is the thing that she stresses in her testimony to the men.

Ques. Do you think as having gone through this process there would be more bounty available?

J.T. That is the next thing. The subject begins in the first epistle, "Put by at home", 1 Corinthians 16:2. You can understand that when a man is converted like this and

he is a worshipper of God that he tells his wife and family and what happens? They are all converted. If we worship God we should bring all our material things to God, too, because they are included, they are needed for the service of God. In our verses it is said that the messengers carried this bounty. That is, Titus and others are "messengers of assemblies, Christ's glory", 2 Corinthians 8:23

Rem. There is a peculiar feature then about assembly giving that bears that character.

J.T. It seems to me that is how the giving of the saints will work out. Other things, of course, affect us, but the prophetic word ought to affect us. God has needs in the testimony for such as we have materially, and we should in a balanced way prepare for the collection as God has prospered us. That is the way to put it. Here the bounty was actually accumulated and passed through assembly hands, so that these messengers are messengers of assemblies and they are Christ's glory.

H.W. This thought of glory is very beautiful coming in here. Is it the thought that the messengers are Christ's glory or the assemblies?

J.T. I think the immediate reference is to the messengers, but of course, it involves the assemblies because they are messengers of the assemblies, but what a thought that a man travelling from Corinth, we will say, to Jerusalem, carrying this money is an expression of Christ's glory. What an attractive thought that is.

H.W. Because it was an expression of what God is -- the bounty of the saints.

J.T. Exactly.

E.I. Does the laying aside at home bring into view the family idea, that which is a support in relation to the assembly?

J.T. I would think so. Wife and children are

brought into it. From my understanding of it it is a household matter, in the sense of budgeting.

Rem. So that the matter of giving is always presented as on the basis of calculation and sobriety. Although the first day of the week is brought in to give the right sentiment to free us, there is no question of mere sentiment.

J.T. It is not a mere sentiment, but it is remarkable that it is brought in there. It is not brought in in relation to the Lord's supper but it is brought in in relation to the giving.

Rem. The laying up at home is in relation to how God has prospered you and what you give in relation to the assembly would be on the principle of calculation.

J.T. That is what is stated. A man comes in with his salary on Saturday and takes his wife into account and they talk about matters. They have their expenses to meet. It is a question of how the Lord has prospered him. It would be simple mathematics. But on Lord's day morning he would discuss the matter again and say, We must be liberal, you know; this is the first day of the week; and the Lord was rich and He became poor for our sakes that we through His poverty might become rich, so that he would be apt to give a little more. Still the principle of mathematics or counting or weighing comes into it because it is according to the prospering, whether he has made more that week or not. He is supposed to know and give accordingly. Paul is very particular on that line, so that we should budget what we have to give. We know each other and know pretty well what we can do on the principle of counting, so that the budget is to be on that principle -- we can do so much.

R.S.T. How would the question of present need bear upon our giving weekly? I mean, you were speaking of budgeting. Most of us do that locally.

Some months there is need for more than others. Do you think we take that into account in our giving?

J.T. There ought to be increase. The announcement of a need ought to bring out the excess. We should sacrifice a little more to meet it. Budgeting has that in mind. The need is to be met.

P.D. Would the thought of the first day of the week appeal to the affections of the saints and cause them to respond?

J.T. That is what I was thinking. A spiritual man would refer to that, how the Lord sacrificed everything, not only that He accomplished redemption, but He was continuous in His love. He sought out the loved ones and looked after them. That is the idea -- you continue in the thing.

N.B.S. The brother conveying the bounty was admitted to a very dignified service.

J.T. It is remarkable how Paul Himself had been used in it. It tells us in Romans and in Acts 11 that he himself and Barnabas and now Titus had been used in it. It is no ordinary matter. The glory of Christ is in it.

THE ASSEMBLY'S BEGINNING AND FAILURE

Revelation 1:9 - 20; Revelation 3:7 - 13; Matthew 18:15 - 20

J.T. The proposal is in view of bringing out the position in the book of Revelation as to the general history of the assembly. The passage in Matthew is suggested because it will enable us to see how the assembly began to function, as one might say, officially, and Revelation shows how it broke down; at least it records the fact. It is thought it will help us all to see how the breakdown took place, and hence the necessity for this book -- what is called the Apocalypse. It is clearly distinct from ordinary assembly epistles and the gospels. It contemplates the breakdown of what the gospels and epistles present as inaugurated by the Lord Himself and by the Spirit. So that we have the Revelation given to the Lord Himself: "Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave to him", Revelation 1:1.

A.P.T. What would the apostle John represent in this matter himself?

J.T. Well, he is a prophet, and not simply an ordinary person who might be included in the list of prophets. They come in second in the list in the classification of gifts in Ephesians: "apostles, prophets, evangelists, pastors and teachers". John has to be regarded as distinct from the ordinary prophets. No doubt all the apostles had the gift of prophecy, but the book of Revelation is not simply a ministry as in the assembly convened; it is written, not spoken but written by one specially used. As it is said here, "he signified it, sending by his angel, to his bondman John", Revelation 1:1. This could hardly be said of any ordinary prophet as is included in the classification in Ephesians. John is viewed as a special servant, a bondman to whom the thing is

signified; not simply revealed by the Spirit in the ordinary sense. It is said that the prophets of old spoke as they were moved by the Holy Spirit, but the word here is 'signified'; "he signified it, sending by his angel, to his bondman John". Clearly, therefore, he has a distinct place, a unique place.

A.R. Can we not come into that place by being bondmen?

J.T. That is a word entering into the book in a special way. It is said, "Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave to him, to shew to his bondmen what must shortly take place". But the whole Apocalypse was signified to John. Other bondmen come into it. It is important that we should, too; every one of us; but John has a unique place. In fact, there is hardly another just like it in all the Scriptures.

R.W.S. Why does God allow the breakdown?

J.T. Well, perhaps it may be to show what He can do in meeting it. You wonder why He allowed Peter to break down, or David. It may be that He intends to show what He can be, or what He is in meeting breakdowns; and this meeting now is in order that we might make inquiry as to what marked the beginning and what marked the breakdown.

A.A.T. Has every testimony broken down? Has the testimony of the different dispensations broken down?

J.T. That is a different thing. The Lord's did not break down; you know that. You would say that. But every dispensation did, because dispensations are committed into the hands of men.

J.T.Jr. Is there a difference between the external side of testimony and what we might refer to as a remnant -- what is faithful?

J.T. That comes out in this book. The first thing is to compare verse 9 with Matthew. The opening verses up until then are introductory; we might say

prefatory, but John is introduced in this formal way: "I John, your brother and fellow-partaker in the tribulation and kingdom and patience, in Jesus, was in the island called Patmos, for the word of God, and for the testimony of Jesus. I became in the Spirit on the Lord's day", Revelation 1:9,10. Now we have nothing like this in his history as an apostle. Then what follows here is, "I heard behind me a great voice as of a trumpet, saying, What thou seest write in a book, and send to the seven assemblies: to Ephesus, and to Smyrna, and to Pergamos, and to Thyatira, and to Sardis, and to Philadelphia, and to Laodicea. And I turned back to see the voice which spoke with me; and having turned, I saw seven golden lamps, and in the midst of the seven lamps one like the Son of man". I think we see here the clue to Matthew 18. That is, the Lord is in the midst of the seven lamps or light-bearers. It says in Matthew 18, "For where two or three are gathered together unto my name, there am I in the midst of them", Matthew 18:20. He is here in the midst of seven assemblies, seven light-bearers. The link is plain enough that He is in the midst in both cases, only there is a great difference between the "in the midst" in Matthew and the "in the midst" of the scene in Patmos. The Lord Himself spoke in Matthew 18 and there are no habiliments at all suggested like these in Revelation 1, so that we have to inquire, Why the change?

F.H.L. Do not some features of this position remain right from Pentecost through to the taking away of the church? The seven are in view, are they not, in the sense that there is a complete thought from the beginning to the end?

J.T. Just so; only there is a great difference between the Lord's attitude here in Revelation and Matthew 18. Matthew 18 must depict what immediately followed -- the inauguration of the assembly at Pentecost, whereas this contemplates an era long

after; although John was alive at Pentecost and he is alive here, but great services took place, including Paul's to bring about these seven assemblies.

A.R. Is Matthew 18 favourable whereas Revelation 1 is unfavourable? There are unfavourable conditions in Revelation in the seven assemblies. He is there judicially or governmentally, like the Son of man.

J.T. Quite so. That is the point, just to see the difference; whether the cause is somewhat to be found in Matthew 18 in trespass by the brethren.

A.N.W. He is in the midst, is He not, in Revelation 1, whether they will or whether they will not; whether they are together in His Name or not? Is that not so? Is that not His rightful position as in the midst of what bears His Name?

J.T. It is; and He is there because there is some basis for His being there. Some here abandon even that position so there must be some basis for His being there in Patmos. He is not mentioned first Himself. What John sees is not the Lord Himself but the seven lamps, as if they were still worthy of notice. They are, indeed, called lamps or light-bearers so that this light was still there shining.

W.C.R. Is there any thought of decline in Matthew 18 in connection with the two or three?

J.T. I think there is. The trespass is perhaps the secret of what we find in Revelation. The first point in Matthew 18 is, "Tell it to the assembly" without any question of her authority or decline. But then the Lord says, "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. For where two or three are gathered together unto my name, there am I in the midst of them", Matthew 18:19,20. That would link on pretty well with Philadelphia in Revelation, so that the first part of the passage or

paragraph in Matthew 18 is what you might call pristine assembly conditions where it is formally owned. "Tell it to the assembly". It formally owns the official place of the assembly. But when the Lord says, "Again I say to you", there is a suggestion that something happened and we are in smaller circumstances.

A.R. Where difficulties appear, the root condition is usually personal feeling.

J.T. Just so. I think the link would be there -- the trespass was not acknowledged. Therefore the solemn word, "Let him be to thee as one of the nations and a tax-gatherer", Matthew 18:17. That would correspond pretty much with 2 Timothy. That is, the principle of iniquity would be there in the refusal to acknowledge the trespass, so that withdrawal, the principle of withdrawal from the man, or designating him as a heathen man and a publican, is necessary. There is the parting of the ways. Then the next thing is, "Again I say to you". The Lord is making provision for that, that if we have to deal with persons in that way, if the thing goes on we may come to a day of small things and we have to look to two. They are of moral importance in being two of the assembly, answering to the assembly, and then two or three answering to it.

A.R. Do you think that was the root here in this place?

J.T. Well, very largely, I would think. The way love had waned as at Corinth. You know how they treated Paul, several of them, and said his letters were weighty but his bodily presence weak and his speech contemptible, 2 Corinthians 10:10. They discredited him. That would be the sort of thing that had become general, I would think, if we can examine this book, because this book is really prophetic. All that is indicated was not just existent when it was written.

A.A.T. Do you think that His position in the

midst of the candlesticks is a continuous position? Is that a position He has taken all the time?

J.T. It is in the sense, as has been remarked, of authority. Any personage or king or president or head of anything would have a right at any time to look into and investigate and challenge conditions. His habiliments are judicial. He has a right in these garments to come in at any time and examine conditions and maybe indict anyone in the position.

A.A.T. In Matthew 18 it would not apply.

J.T. It would apply. That is just what Matthew 18 does suggest, that there are judicial conditions. There is a regular prosecution that enters into church order, and prosecution in view of discovering or having sin judged and dealt with. That is the point in the passage.

F.H.L. Would "Let him be to thee", Matthew 18:17, answer to the overcomer? It is an individual appeal.

J.T. Pretty much. As far as you are concerned, you are done with him. The others may not be, but you are taking the lead in being done with him morally and as far as you are concerned the assembly has the final word. That is, hold or maintain the truth of the assembly. What would we do without the court? It is a judicial position.

A.A.T. The court is not the care meeting, is it?

J.T. No, but it is preliminary. It is leading up to it.

E.S. Would you explain the use of the word 'kingdom' in verse 6 in relation to what we were speaking about in connection with the breakdown?

J.T. We were speaking of that in Rochester, as to how the saints are constituted a kingdom. There are several kingdoms spoken of in the Scriptures, but this one seems to be to meet an emergency, just in keeping with what we have said already. Matthew 18 is an emergency and we are provided with the means to deal with it, and they are conclusive. The thing

does not go by the board. It reaches the assembly, that is, the court, the head authority representative of heaven. Now Revelation 1:6 says, "has made us a kingdom, priests to his God and Father". That would give the saints authority to act in power. Any kingdom has ramifications, because the idea of a kingdom would be represented in a republic as much as in an empire or an ordinary kingdom. They all have the same features of a kingdom, and if conditions arise that are intolerable, that, we will say, Matthew 18 does not meet, if the Lord brings out the idea of a kingdom and constitutes the saints in a given place or generally a kingdom, then they can proceed against evil that may exist that may be intolerable. If the Lord Jesus makes us into a kingdom, we can deal with it. There is no reason why we should ever be driven to the wall by wickedness.

J.A.P. With regard to the word 'breakdown', if Matthew 18 is functioning, is that breakdown? If there is power in the saints to meet evil, is that breakdown?

J.T. It does not seem so. Matthew 18 is intact at first, but then if we read carefully and keep the Apocalypse and the epistles to Timothy in mind, we can see that there is a second matter. "Again I say to you", the Lord says, "that if two of you shall agree". He has already said, "Whatsoever ye shall bind on the earth shall be bound in heaven". That is a big thing. That is an immense power in the hands of the saints, but then He passes on from that and uses the word 'again' meaning there is a change of events, a change of circumstances; a smaller set of circumstances, and He begins with two, saying, "If two of you shall agree". Two of you, notice; that is, two of the assembly. The idea is still intact in their minds. They have access to heaven. They ask the Father who is in heaven. They are united about it. It is given to them, those two. Well, that

might be enlarged into a kingdom, if you get those two on moral lines. They have agreed about a thing and heaven is listening to them and heaven answers them, so that the thing is given to them. That may be the basis or nucleus of a kingdom provided by the Lord or constituted by the Lord to meet a very wide emergency; because we have had in the history of the testimony certain things beginning small but widening out everywhere and it becomes dangerous, and the Lord usually comes in and constitutes persons with power to deal with it.

J.T.Jr. John speaks in his third epistle about having written something to the assembly. He says, "I wrote something to the assembly; but Diotrephes, who loves to have the first place among them, receives us not. For this reason, if I come, I will bring to remembrance his works which he does, babbling against us with wicked words; and not content with these, neither does he himself receive the brethren; and those who would he prevents, and casts them out of the assembly", 3 John 1:9,10. Would that show what had come in even at the beginning?

J.T. That helps us, I think. The lady, the person in the second epistle, who was a sister, whom he directs that if one comes, not having the doctrine, he is not to be received into the house, nor even be bidden God-speed, 2 John 1:10 -- all that would point to what we are speaking of; how emergencies are met and how the saints are changed by the Lord into a court or kingdom with authority to deal with evil.

R.W.S. So that what precedes the "again", "tell it to the assembly", and the two or three agreeing -- the one is as legal as the other.

J.T. That is good. You are in reduced circumstances but the legality is there; not using the word 'legality' as anything that binds up the brethren but what is owned to be right and of God.

R.W.S. Is that not where we are tested? An

action in pristine conditions might be bowed to by reason of the very number of those who bow, whereas the "two of you" might be just two weak brothers ostensibly or publicly. Is that not the test, to understand that that is just as legal as what existed at first?

J.T. That is very good. And then the extension is to "two or three", which is wider and may go to any extent.

A.N.W. Would you say a word as to the bearing of the "unto my name". That seems to be the crucial point there.

J.T. Gathering together is also a matter of importance publicly. The 'two' are not said to gather together nor are they said to do anything in the Lord's Name. It is to stress the importance of agreement or unity in two persons who are constitutionally assembly persons. It is to bring out the value of assembly persons, whereas the next verse, verse 20 says, "For where two or three are gathered together unto my name, there am I in the midst of them". That is a public position and the Name has authority vested in it.

A.R. Paul stressed the idea of unity before he stressed the idea of withdrawal in 1 Corinthians.

J.T. Quite so; unity in 1 Corinthians 1 and authority in 1 Corinthians 5.

A.R. We so stress the idea of authority we forget the idea of unity.

J.T. That is the order and I am sure that is important. He says, "ye and my spirit being gathered together, with the power of our Lord Jesus Christ", 1 Corinthians 5:4. That is what I was thinking of, the apostolic spirit; and then, the person "being such", 1 Corinthians 5:5. Let us be sure that what is alleged is so, "to deliver him, I say, being such, to Satan for destruction of the flesh". You have not only the court but the executioner, you might say, because the

prisoner is not only condemned but he is put under limitations; delivered to Satan in this case.

A.P.T. Referring again to the "two" in verse 19, would that be, as you were saying, not exactly assembled together, but they have assembly status in that sense? They agree on a matter. Is that the way you look at it? "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". These two persons are not assembled as we get in verse 20, but they have assembly status as a result of their agreement.

J.T. The point of importance or value attached to them is that it is "two of you". You just wonder why it should say "on the earth", but it is to bring out the position, I suppose, the position of the assembly. I think we can see how much enters into this; how heaven is brought into it, and the Father; and these two are on earth and they are agreed and they ask and it comes to them. I think that is very important, how a thing starts. This thing may be some widespread leaven or heresy, as has taken place frequently in the history of the testimony or assembly -- a widespread thing may begin small. As James says, "See how little a fire, how large a wood it kindles!" James 3:5. It begins small, but how wide it may extend!

R.W.S. Is this necessarily two in a locality? Two brothers or a brother and a sister.

J.T. It would seem as if it could be either a brother or sister. Take the elect lady whom John mentions, or Gaius. Suppose they were two. Or suppose it were Priscilla and Aquila. You can see, if they were living in Corinth and Paul were attacked or the truth were attacked, how they would agree and speak to God, and it should come to them from heaven. It might begin to spread.

A.A.T. In verses 18 and 19 are we not in the

midst of a discipline matter? The context before and after indicates that discipline is in view, does it not?

J.T. Yes; it is a question of a brother. "If thy brother sin against thee". It is a trespass matter, and then what you are to do. It has been often gone over, but we are just looking at it now as to how it merges publicly with what we have in Revelation; this matter of the Apocalypse, which is something that does not appear in the Lord's remarks in the gospels nor is it accounted for in the epistles by the apostles. It is something that is contemplated as coming in later, called an Apocalypse, an unveiling, meaning it was not exposed. The thing was not exposed, but now it is exposed and it is to meet conditions that were mysterious in the way of wickedness. "The mystery of iniquity" is spoken of in 2 Thessalonians 2:7 and it is spoken of also here; the mystery of the seven stars, etc. The word 'mystery' comes in several times in the Apocalypse. The word 'Apocalypse' means an unveiling, but it is not contemplated in the early ministry or writings of the New Testament except here. It was written here, of course, in John's time, apostolic times, but it is an unveiling of something that is to develop later fully.

J.A.P. In regard to what you say about mystery, I notice it says in the letter to Ephesus, "thou canst not bear evil men; and thou hast tried them who say that themselves are apostles and are not, and hast found them liars", Revelation 2:2. You would think they had a good reputation in dealing with things, but is not the mystery of evil you are speaking of suggested in: "thou hatest the works of the Nicolaitanes, which I also hate"?

J.T. They were faithful to a point, but there is something against them. At the same time Ephesus seems to be generally in a fairly reliable condition. But now, is it the point at which or into which

Matthew 18 enters? Matthew 18 was evidently held as a weapon in the discipline in the assembly, but did it fail to meet conditions in Ephesus which is the first church mentioned? That is, was it enough to expose the fact that love had failed in Ephesus; that it had left its first love; that it happened at the very time in which they were trying those that said they were apostles and were not, and they did not like the Nicolaitanes, but still there is something happening there that the Lord has to resent, and did Matthew 18 enter at that point? Was it enough to meet that, or was that ever met? Was the want of love in the assembly ever really adjusted? That is a question to be understood.

G.V.D. Does not love underlie gaining a brother? Usually it is a matter of gaining the brother.

J.T. It is. Love was supposed to be there. The man that was trespassed against, if he has it, will succeed, and the procedure indicated would suggest he did succeed. That is, the man's state is recognised by someone. He is guilty of unconfessed trespass, and unfit for the fellowship.

A.R. Paul says in 1 Corinthians 13:8, "Love never fails".

J.T. It is significant that that is brought in at Corinth. They failed at Ephesus. They were able to judge bad doctrine, but they failed in the matter of love.

F.H.L. Is that why you linked it with Philadelphia? They had an open door and a little power.

J.T. Yes; I hope we shall see that there is a point of merging between Matthew 18 and Revelation 1, for the Apocalypse contemplates that some hidden thing has happened in the history of the church, and it is a question of whether it was ever adjusted.

A.N.W. Are you carrying the idea of Matthew 18

and the trespass both into the meeting for prayer and the administrative meeting in verse 20?

J.T. I would. These are the resources that we have, but how long do they last? How long will they hold against the evil? Why did the Apocalypse have to come in and the peculiar attitude the Lord Himself takes up judicially?

F.S.C. Would you bring in the turning away from Paul in Asia? He says, "all who are in Asia, of whom is Phygellus and Hermogenes, have turned away from me", 2 Timothy 1:15.

J.T. Quite so. There is an event in the history of the church that had to be dealt with, and many other such things are alluded to in Paul's own word; like Alexander the coppersmith and Demas' defection. These are all matters that have to be adjusted, and of conditions in Corinth the apostle says in the letter, 'When your obedience is fulfilled I will have to deal with them', but did he ever deal with them? It is just a question of whether they were ever dealt with. Are we obliged to allow things to lapse as unable to deal with them, or is there a means by which we can deal with them? Matthew 18 ought to hold, but evidently it had failed and Revelation contemplates that -- that love in the assembly had failed.

A.P.T. In Paul's address to the elders he says, "and from among your own selves shall rise up men speaking perverted things to draw away the disciples after them", Acts 20:30. Would there be some lapse locally to allow that?

J.T. There you are. There is another point -- the elders of Ephesus. In fact, when we come to look at it now, we will see how many things there are that were already working even before the Apocalypse was given. Its application is plain. It contemplates the ending of apostolic ministry here below. John, of course, was an apostle, more as mysterious, continuing to the end, according to the end of his gospel, but

apostolic power had waned when the book of Revelation was inspired.

A.N.W. The Lord Jesus walking in the midst of the assemblies would denote he was not entirely restful but that something needed examination.

J.T. I think that is right. He had to go journeys.

D.Macd. In relation to two of you agreeing on a matter, sometimes a situation may come up in a local assembly and there is a difference of opinion, and it comes up time and time again -- the same issue. Is it then a question of two persons agreeing on the matter?

J.T. It would seem as if something has to be done, not by the whole meeting, but by some two. That supposes loyalty in at least two. There will be something done. It will be successful. It will be done to them, the Lord says, of My Father which is in heaven. If we can get a condition like that, we may be sure we will get results. Even although it is a widespread matter, it will be met.

R.W.S. Is there not a suggestion that it will be added to? It speaks of "two or three" following that.

J.T. Just so.

A.N.W. And then further, the subsequent evidence that the Lord was in it. "There am I" He says, showing that He was in it.

J.T. Quite so. If He has a footing surely something will be done.

J.L.F. In what way does the one that is offending hear the assembly?

J.T. That is another thing. That would be a matter of procedure, too; whether two brothers were sent to him, or whether he were present. We are told in Timothy, "Those that sin convict before all", 1 Timothy 5:20. That would mean he was present. Sometimes the offending brother is not present, and, of course, that is a disadvantage. If he were honest,

he would be present. If he knows the brethren have a charge against him, he should be present, but if he is not present, the brethren would have to go and see him. I suppose two would have to go and see him.

A.R. If there is withdrawal, there is self-will somewhere. A person being withdrawn from is a result of an act of self-will on the part of that person.

J.T. What is your point?

A.R. It shows there is a bad state in the person.

J.T. Well, we will suppose that this person who is contemplated here has trespassed against his brother, and the brother addresses him and he fails to listen, and then he brings two others and he fails to listen to them, then the next thing is, Will he hear the assembly? Tell it to the assembly, and if he will not hear the assembly, "let him be to thee"; that would mean, if he will not hear the assembly, he is a self-willed person, and it is not simply now that he has trespassed against a brother, but he has trespassed against the assembly. He is showing disrespect for divine authority, because divine authority is vested in the assembly. I suppose that is what makes the sin so serious.

A.A.T. Is he wicked?

J.T. That is the inference. We do not get what the assembly does. We have to go to Corinthians for that. Matthew 18 does not go that far, but it shows how the brother who is trespassed against can bring in conviction of the brother who trespasses and establishes the idea of the assembly. It is to regulate how the brother acts who is trespassed against and what he is to do. What he does is to regard the man as a heathen and a publican. The assembly's action is not stated.

A.N.W. Would it not be in verse 18? I wondered if that might not give us the authoritative action of the assembly, and then the Lord turns to the plural

again: "Whatsoever ye shall bind on the earth shall be bound in heaven".

J.T. That is authority that they can take on, but it does not say they took it on. The Lord does not go that far. He indicates how the matter can be settled. What is left unsaid is for faith to proceed in. It is right to act on.

A.R. Why should two brothers or two sisters be divided? God has linked us together. It is because there is some issue.

J.T. Is not the issue here a trespass? The man does not listen to his brother.

A.R. Cain and Abel were divided over the idea of a gift.

J.T. Quite so. It is the want of love and subjection.

R.W.S. It must require skill to reprove. It says in verse 15, "go, reprove him". The note says, 'to show the true character of anything, so as to convict, and hence reprove by showing a man's fault'. It must require skill to know how far grace should operate, and how far love should go in this matter of reproving. Is that why it is "two of you"?

J.T. I suppose love is really the basic power of dealing with the matter. It never fails, but the Lord seems to have in mind that we should be thoroughly versed in the procedure with one another, to adjust matters of this kind in the assembly, and He shows that the procedure laid down by Him is successful. The man is isolated as far as the one whom he has trespassed against is concerned. He is isolated. Well, I think all that put with the other facts that we have implies that we have light. Intelligence enables us to proceed with this light to a full result. So that "If two of you" comes in, and then, "Whatsoever ye shall bind on the earth shall be bound in heaven". That is there, and it seems to be in a way constitutional; what belongs to the conditions as

governing this matter, and the brethren can take it up.

W.C.R. The little strength in Philadelphia corresponds with the two or three?

J.T. I think we might link that on there. What is clear now is that there is enough in what the Lord says to furnish light for us as to any matter that has to be reached governmentally. The Lord gives us intelligence to take things up. The Lord is dealing with persons who are of the assembly: "two of you" and they have enough light to proceed and to reach a conclusion.

J.T.Jr. Would you say in principle that the Lord acted on this when He spoke to Peter in the previous chapter? It says He anticipated him. He did not let the matter drop without being spoken about. I mean in chapter 17. It says, "And when he came into the house, Jesus anticipated him, saying" Matthew 17:25. Did you have that in mind, that the thing is taken right up? The whole matter was settled quickly. The piece of money that was found in the fish's mouth settled the matter. The matter of paying the tax was settled.

J.T. If you carry that through into chapter 18 -- we are dealing with two persons who are at odds -- one of them is right morally and the other is not. The question is whether the evidence we have in the paragraph we read in chapter 18 is enough to reach a conclusion. You might say, Well, there is nothing said as to what is to be done with this man. One brother has to regard him as a heathen man and a publican, and others are not doing it. They might say, we do not see that we should do that. Is there not enough light in the instruction the Lord gives to settle the matter? I believe the Lord would convey to us that we are assembly persons and have light, and that He gives us enough for us to go on and reach a conclusion.

R.W.S. Reaching a conclusion individually.

J.T. I think the whole assembly could reach a conclusion on the facts given. That is, this brother is a righteous man. He has shown himself to be righteous. He has gone the whole way with the other man, and he, in his own mind, is settled as to him and regards him as a heathen man and a publican. Can the matter hang in the air like that? No. The Lord has given enough for the assembly person, or the assembly itself to act. The assembly is composed of intelligent persons. If we have a case brought in such as the Lord indicates here, there ought to be enough intelligence in the assembly to settle the matter, so that we do not need to let things drag. If he is a heathen and a publican, if the Lord says that man is not fit to be your companion or to have any fellowship with you, then he is not fit for the assembly.

A.A.T. A heathen and a publican is out of fellowship.

J.T. Can we not furnish all that is necessary? The law of the house is not like the law of Moses. It contemplates that the assembly, which has to do with the matter, is formed of intelligent persons.

A.N.W. If there is nothing personal nor any prejudice, there would be a unified action in regard to it.

J.T. Can a man stand by himself? If he has judged that the man is to be treated as a heathen man and a publican, are the other brethren to stand by and say nothing? The Lord does not mean that at all. The word 'you' there is a guide. The assembly is formed by persons who are intelligent, and made intelligent by the Spirit, so that they will know what to do. The Lord has given us enough information so that we can act. What can we do in every care meeting, but see that that brother is righteous? His attitude is right and we must all support him. It is intelligent persons that have to do with him.

J.H. Was it not a serious matter in Acts 15 when Paul and Silas separated from Barnabas and Mark. The brethren sent forth Paul and Silas. Is that akin to an assembly action?

J.T. It shows that the brethren generally were with Paul. That is as clear as anything. Of course, the authoritative thing there was the letter written by the assembly, by the elders and by the Spirit. The Spirit confirmed it. It was sent abroad among the Gentiles. That was the conclusive, authoritative thing. What happened between Paul and Barnabas was a matter of heat. There was contention between them and it was so strong that they separated one from another, but there was no assembly action called for in that. Paul was justified in the mind of the brethren generally.

J.H. I meant as regards Mark. He was justified in his action that Mark should not go with him.

J.T. It was not an assembly matter. It was a levitical matter between the two. We would all say Paul was right, but we could not say more than that, because Barnabas was not out of fellowship, nor Mark either. This matter involves a person unfit for fellowship, and if one brother says it is so, are the others to say nothing? The Lord says, "Whatsoever ye shall bind on the earth shall be bound in heaven". Bind that man that is unfit for fellowship.

A.A.T. Then we turn to 2 Timothy to act?

J.T. We do not need to turn anywhere. This is spiritually anterior to 2 Timothy. This is a condition that might arise at any time after the assembly was inaugurated. Things were still intact, but when the Lord says, "Again I say unto you", He means there will be a change from that, and I think the book of Revelation contemplates that and 2 Timothy also.

R.W.S. Does the practical working out of this expose the Corinthian state that exists? We read about Philadelphia, but concretely it is humbling --

the lack of uniformity of judgment and action towards those withdrawn from.

J.T. Clearly, but the position at Corinth was not really settled. There were many others, and that is just what ought to come up now; how much there is allowed to pass because general conditions among the brethren do not afford power to exercise discipline where it should be exercised. He says, "having in readiness to avenge all disobedience", 2 Corinthians 10:6. And he tells us in the second letter of those who were still reprobate, and he says, I am waiting for you brethren to judge yourselves in every detail. I must wait for your obedience so that I can proceed against the others. We cannot say that they ever were proceeded against.

A.P.T. Does he not seem to have a little hesitancy in the end of the second epistle as to coming again, that the difficulty would still be there? Does he seem to suggest that?

J.T. I would say so. He had in mind to come, but then did he come? Did he deal with all these persons? I think we are reminded that if they are not dealt with, at any rate they should be spoken of. It should be understood that they exist and the book of Revelation contemplates that there are things existent that have not been dealt with.

J.A.P. Do you think the case of Absalom in David's kingdom was always a source of weakness?

J.T. It was. The book of Revelation contemplates there are many such matters. Every assembly had something that had not been dealt with.

A.N.W. "How say some among you that there is not a resurrection?" 1 Corinthians 15:12.

J.T. Just so. Was it ever dealt with?

A.R. Joab was a politician.

J.T. His was a case that was never settled until Solomon came to the throne, and so it is in all these letters to the assemblies, the Lord has almost in every

one something that He has against them, meaning it has been there and has not been dealt with. So that He says, "But I have against thee that thou permittest the woman Jezebel", Revelation 2:20. How long had she been there? Are there any such conditions around in the gatherings today? Are there conditions that there is not enough power to enable us to deal with them?

W.C.R. If that is the case it would be equivalent to saying there was really no assembly status in the place.

J.T. You might modify that a little, because the conditions at Corinth would not allow the apostle to deal with serious evil there. Are there such conditions now? We have to look into it. I think two of you agreeing is a great point. If you get one or two who are right with God, God will act with them and for them.

A.N.W. You have these assemblies, but the word is addressed to the angel of that assembly, and that element coming to light would take the word on.

J.T. The word 'angel' is really the link with God, like the spirit in a man. A man's spirit is like the lamp of the Lord in the man's self, and so it is the angel in the assembly is like the spirit that God can act with and use against the whole assembly to set it right.

R.W.S. "Having in readiness to avenge all disobedience, when your obedience is fulfilled". "Your obedience", is general, is it not, more than the two or three in Corinth?

J.T. The whole company had to be righted in the matter before the apostle could proceed. There was a strong party of them and it might mean a split in the meeting if Paul were to proceed against them.

R.W.S. Did it begin with two?

J.T. Very likely. The house of Chloe. What about her? She was one like that; and the house of

Stephanas. These were things that Paul could use there to bring about better conditions, and so he sent Timothy there.

F.H.L. Was he afraid of conditions developing in Philippi when he addressed Euodia and Syntyche?

J.T. They were not right; although it was a very wholesome assembly, yet they were to be of one mind in the Lord. All these matters ought to be settled, and there ought not be anyone acting lawlessly amongst us, doing as they wish. The secret is that the general condition of the assembly in such a case is not right.

A.P.T. Persons who only come to the breaking of bread are really not in agreement locally, are they?

J.T. You just wonder about a person like that. The allusion in chapter 11 of 1 Corinthians helps. "For this cause", 1 Corinthians 11:30. Well, these are the causes. The cause, of course, immediately was the conduct in the meeting when they did come to the Lord's supper.

W.W.M. Where there has been withdrawal, or we might say, binding, there is a unity there with others, but it is just as important when there is a loosing that no feeling is carried.

J.T. That is the thing; to get to the end of matters. The end of a matter is better than the beginning, especially in the evil; getting it finished.

W.W.M. In regard to your reference to feelings, Mark's name has been mentioned. While that was not an assembly matter exactly, as you say, but it was between Levites, yet you can understand when Paul says to bring Mark for he is serviceable to me for ministry, it would suggest that the man has thoroughly judged his course and now he should be received by all.

J.T. There should be no question about him at all. Very often when a man has really judged himself and the brethren want him to be with them, some are not free about it, and that is where the difficulty

arises, but in Mark's case the matter is clear. It is a finished matter.

W.C.R. The eleven stood up with Peter.

J.T. Yes; indeed. They had no difficulties about him now. The end of a matter is better than the beginning, especially if it is a recovery, where there is restoration.

A.P.T. Would it be right to suggest if love is not acting the action is negligible? It is really love in all assembly discipline; the love of God as seen in the cross and the judgment of Calvary.

J.T. It is the one thing that is missing really at Corinth; the one thing that could not be illustrated. It is like a picture. 1 Corinthians 13 stands by itself. It is a description of love; not a model of love, but a description of it. It is one thing to get a description of a person, and it is another thing to get a picture of him, and the final thing to see the person himself. So that Paul gave us the description of love in chapter 13 and other such evidences of what was in his mind, but he sent Timothy so that he might live among them day and night, as it were, that they might learn in him Paul's ways as they were in Christ. As it were, he was Paul himself. That was better than a description in writing.

A.A.T. That is why Timothy is called his son.

J.T. The description in writing is, of course, vague, but the person is an embodiment. We had the idea of impersonation, persons being impersonated in other persons. Elijah, when the Lord was here, was impersonated in John the baptist, but he was himself on the mount. The actual Elijah was there. "Two men ... who were Moses and Elias". They were not impersonated. They were the veritable Moses and the veritable Elijah, but John the baptist was representing Elijah. The Lord says, "If ye will receive it, this is Elias, who is to come", Matthew 11:14. But there is another Elijah to come yet, but no

doubt it will be some other impersonator; a man right here on earth, whereas Elijah has departed to be in heaven. Well now, I mention all that because it is a principle in the letter to Corinth -- the impersonation of Paul. "For this reason I have sent to you Timotheus, who is my beloved and faithful child in the Lord", 1 Corinthians 4:17, as if it were a complete representation of the apostle. And why? "Who shall put you in mind of my ways as they are in Christ". That is important, too, to keep in our minds, because John the baptist represents it, and it will come in presently in relation to the Jews. Elijah is to come. Are there not impersonations in some little degree among the brethren that remind us of what is real; whether it be in the Lord Himself, or in the apostles, or later ministry because it is better to have the person than to hear about him?

A.P.T. Paul says later he had no one like-minded. Whom does he refer to there?

J.T. Himself, I would think. "For I have no one like-minded who will care with genuine feeling how ye get on", Philippians 2:20. That is, how he would himself care for the saints, and Timothy would have the same way with him.

A.R. He says, "Yet shew I unto you a way of more surpassing excellence", 1 Corinthians 12:31.

J.T. That is descriptive. He was not saying that it was a model of love among the Corinthians, nor that he himself was a model of love. It was just a writing; the showing was just in writing, not an impersonation. It is a beautiful description, but it is only a description. There is no person there. They are all abstract statements.

W.C.R. What is the thought of the Lord writing the name: "I will write upon him the name of my God, and the name of the city of my God, the new Jerusalem, which comes down out of heaven, from

my God, and my new name", Revelation 3:12? What is the thought in the name?

J.T. That is representation, I think, too. You would be reminded of His God and of New Jerusalem. The person who is an overcomer in Philadelphia would remind you of the things mentioned, which is near to what we are saying. It is very near to the idea of impersonation. The Lord Jesus is a perfect impersonation of the Father. John the baptist, in ministry, was the impersonation of Elijah.

R.W.S. Despite the two or three, if our eyes are open do you think we will discover all these features working out practically in the idea of impersonation in the fellowship?

J.T. I think so. I think there are reproductions in the family of God. We are sure to get near likenesses. In all families you get near likenesses, and no doubt there are now near likenesses of past ministry.

THE THIRD APPEARING OF JESUS IN RESURRECTION

John 21:4 - 17

This chapter, as most of us will know, is an appendix or a postscript. It is written after. The gospel is complete at the end of chapter 20. This, therefore, is, as I said, an afterthought, but a full thought. It is a dispensational chapter indeed, as if the Spirit through the apostle were to compare the dispensational idea, saying, "This is already the third time that Jesus had been manifested to the disciples, being risen from among the dead", John 21:14. So that the showing to the disciples is found in this afterthought or postscript. The other two occasions are in the body of the book; they are found in chapter 20. This third occasion is found in the appendix, as if it must be there. It must not be overlooked in this great composition known as the fourth gospel.

A dispensational idea comes in, for the third time alludes to the millennium, or what immediately precedes it; what is intended to make it up, that is to say, not only the Jews but the nations. The Jews will lead, have the first place, but the nations come in, too, for indeed, primarily the Jewish nation was intended to be in the very centre of the earth, of the circle of the nations. They are essential, therefore, to the divine scheme on the earth, and these one hundred and fifty-three great fishes are symbolical of the nations. They are viewed as great at the end. The Israelites, that is, the Jews as we speak of them now, come into chapter 20. That is, they are seen where Thomas appears, having been absent at the first great meeting of the disciples with the Lord after He rose. The first meeting is on the first day of the week. It has a great place in that chapter, and it is signalised

by being the day of the first great gathering of the disciples with the Lord after He rose from the dead. What a day that was! The day of chapter 20. The first day is inaugurated by the glory of the Father. The first day of the week is signalised as representing the gathering of the assembly -- the greatest thought in the universe outside of divine Persons. The Lord Jesus came where the disciples were. They were first in His heart as He arose. He came where they were. That was the first appearing. The second was when Thomas was present eight days afterwards. What occupied the Lord during those eight days we have to leave, but He was occupied well. Luke would say, Those eight days have to be deducted from the forty. There were thirty-two days more, but those eight were between the first gathering in the upper room and the second when Thomas was present. Luke would say that the Lord was engaged with His own even in those eight days during what we call the week-days, the week-nights. We have enjoyment from the incomings of the Lord on those days on the same principle as we have it on the first day of the week. The first day is supremely the day in which the Lord is known in the midst of His own; but Luke would say and does say, that during all those forty days He appeared to His apostles. Here we are told that this is the third time in which the Lord showed Himself to His disciples; the third time. Now, there are many other times; there are several mentioned in 1 Corinthians 15 and we know that there are some mentioned in Luke and some mentioned in the early days of the Acts, but these three are particularly in mind at this time in this postscript, as I said; this afterthought of John, yet a full thought, a precious thought, a spiritual thought, a Spirit-inspired thought. It is the third. Therefore, it is bound up with chapter 20 in this sense. It is the third of three occasions in which the Lord showed Himself

to His disciples characteristically. He showed Himself to Mary, by herself, but that is not included here. He showed Himself to the two on the way to Emmaus, but that is not included here. The Spirit has in mind it is a characteristic showing to the disciples. There were a good few of them. They were not all there. There are a good few of us here now, so that this has a characteristic bearing to the time of the appearing to the disciples. You can well understand, dear brethren, that these meetings are much more important than any experiences we may have ordinarily in an individual sense. The appearings to individuals are not mentioned in these three. These are three singled out as characteristic appearings to the apostles or the disciples. The word 'disciple' here is more than simply that they were believers. It is really tantamount to the fact that they were apostles. Peter was there and Matthew was there and John was there. It is a characteristic time, and so was the season in the eighth day of chapter 20, and the first day of chapter 20; and so an occasion like this is a dignified occasion and those who miss it miss dignity. They miss something that they will never get afterwards. I mean to say, there will be others afterward, but not just the same. There is always something distinctive. In each of these appearings, there was something distinctive. The first was the greatest, and there will be a last one of these meetings on earth, and I should not like to miss it if I have not gone to the Lord before. I certainly should not like to miss the last occasion such as this. Many will, I am afraid, and we should be warned not to miss.

Well, now, I wanted, in making these remarks, to show how the occasion here, this third appearing, has peculiar dignity attached to it. The phrases and the words and thoughts all bear this thought, this suggestion: that it is a time of dignity. It is very like other times. It is a fishing affair, a fish matter in the

sea of Galilee. It was not a large sea, but it was large enough for the Lord to bring out great thoughts from the standpoint of the sea. It is nothing, you might say, as compared with the Atlantic or the Pacific or the Arctic or Antarctic. It was a few miles long and a few miles wide -- a small lake, but it was enough to be called a sea and enough to bring out thoughts of the sea, and miracles belonging to the sea -- one hundred and fifty-three great fishes -- great fishes in a small lake, for it really was a small lake. What size these fishes were we are not told, but they are called great, and the word 'great' is intended to convey to us that they were great. Whether they were really ordinary in the lake, who can say? We read of one that had a piece of money in its mouth. The Lord knew that one and he knew the piece of money was there. We read, too, of a fish that had Jonah in it. It was not an ordinary fish of the Mediterranean. It was prepared of God for that purpose. We must not forget that God can do things for a purpose, for an occasion, for an emergency, and that fish was for an emergency that swallowed Jonah. God prepared him. You could not find him in the aquarium anywhere, nor his bones. It was provided for the occasion. So that fish that the Lord told Peter to find, with the piece of money in its mouth enough for the tax, was undoubtedly a fish of that kind: a fish made for the purpose. And may I not add those one hundred and fifty-three great fishes? One would like to have seen them! How long were they? And yet they would not be much in seeing them. They were just fishes, but they were great; quite a good many, one hundred and fifty-three. Why did they stop to count them? Well, I have alluded to the idea of dignity, and surely the word or phrase "great fishes" belongs to the great phrases or terms in this chapter. It is a chapter of dignity.

Well, the first thing that might be thought negative

to what I am saying is that it was a fishing scene and those who were engaged in it had been engaged in fishing before. It was their trade, and the Lord found them in that trade. He found two sets of them in that trade. That was the beginning. Now the question arises spiritually, Is there any change in these men? Of course, Nathanael was not in the first fishing scene. He is seen in John 1, but is there not a change in these men? They are turned aside to fish when they should have been fishing for men, but nevertheless they had not lost their discipleship, nor had they lost their apostleship. The Lord is not quick to discard us, you know. He is very patient with us. He holds on to us. There is no idea that these men lost their apostleship in the fact that they went off fishing. There is no thought that Peter lost his apostleship because he denied the Lord. There is not a word about that. The Lord never brings it up. I am speaking thus that we might come to regard the Lord even in the service. He does not discard us quickly. He values us and He never forgets our best moments, what we used to be; in our darkest moments the Lord never forgets the brightest moment. Did He forget the brightest moments of these seven in this expedition? No. He is not saying to them, You are all wrong. No, He said, Children. "Children, have ye anything to eat?" John 21:5. You will not assume for a moment, I am sure, that I am in any way minimising the fact that they turned aside to fish when they should be waiting for the Lord to appoint them their work after He arose. The Lord knew well how to deal with that. In fact, there is something here to show that He was dealing with it. The fact that He raised the question of whether they had any meat, knowing well they had not, was just to remind them they had been working for nothing. They had got nothing for their night's work. If we are not catching anything, then there is something

wrong with us. It is a fine thing, when a person is a little away, however little, to call a halt and challenge himself or herself why it is I have no results. When I speak of results, I do not mean simply persons who are converted through me or make confessions through me. No, not that at all. That is only one result. There are many others that are open to the Levites, but in this case there was none. They said, No. They had to say it. The Lord meant them to say it. The Lord did not say it Himself, He could have. It was evident. He could have looked at their boat and seen it was empty. Fishermen always look at the depth of the boat; the draft of the boat will indicate. If they go shell fishing that is the way they determine at a distance whether the expedition is a success, the draft of the boats. These shell fishing boats draft heavily.

Now, the Lord knew that, but He asked them to tell whether they caught anything, and they said, No. We have no meat. But the Lord said, "Children". Very beautiful, I think. The link of affection is established at once. John says, "It is the Lord", John 21:7. Well, now I wanted to bring out this dignity in these one hundred and fifty-three fishes and how they point to the dignity of the nations as they come into God's possession in the future. There is no moral dignity attached to the nations now. Not that I want to say a word against the authorities, but there is none. There is none where there is not a full recognition of Christ. But then when the Lord gathers the nations they are worth gathering. He is going to have them. "And the nations shall walk by its light; and the kings of the earth bring their glory to it", Revelation 21:24. That is a clear indication of what they are. How rich, how wealthy, how valuable, how worth having. That is really, dispensationally, what is meant. You can see the importance of this afterthought, that surely the Lord would not want to

leave the nations out. His earthly people, that is, the Jews, are involved in Thomas in the second meeting in chapter 20, and the assembly is in the first meeting, and it would look as if the Lord were to say. Well, I must not leave the nations out. I must bring them in. And hence the postscript, as I said.

So we have one hundred and fifty-three great fishes. They are counted. They are worth having. The Lord said, "Bring of the fishes which ye have now taken". They are recognised; they are owned as having taken them although the Lord had directed how it should happen. "Cast the net at the right side of the ship and ye will find", John 21:6. As I was saying a moment ago, was it not a miracle? Were they just fish that were usually caught there? Who can say? Why not say they were prepared for the purpose? So the nations will be prepared for the purpose. They are not in evidence now. The nations are now represented in ourselves. God is gathering out of the nations His people and is placing them in the assembly, so that we have to understand what these fishes really are. They are great. The nations as they are today are wanting. God is owning them and they are here today, but they are not the ones that are pictured in that one hundred and fifty-three great fishes. These are the product of the labourers, of the Israelites, the twelve, whoever they may be; the working people of that day. They will be honoured in the nations being gathered together for their service. "And the nations shall walk by its light", Revelation 21:24. It is a very beautiful phrase. They walk in the light of the heavenly city. That is to say, they walk in the light of the assembly in heavenly glory, and also, they bring their glory to it, showing how entirely they are secured for heaven.

So, as I said, these one hundred and fifty-three fishes, great fishes, point to dignity in this part of the gospel. They point to a dispensational result in

the future, but then, as the Spirit of God says, "Every scripture is divinely inspired, and profitable for teaching", 2 Timothy 3:16, and this is profitable now for more than I have said. It is profitable for ourselves, that in these last days I believe God is aiming at dignity among the brethren. Of course, we have to own that there are very few persons of value coming in among us. We may as well accept that. There are some. Thank God there are some among us who have not come in in that sense. They are born and brought up among us and, of course, they are the best -- I would say, the best soil. And yet, surely, there is something for us as to persons of value in the service and ornamentation in the assembly in coming in through the gospel. There are many of them abroad, and the Spirit of God shows that in the early days there were distinguished men. Some distinguished in this world like Theophilus and Paul, or Saul, and many others; but there are others distinguished, as converted, through spirituality and that is the great point. There is no value really in what a person may have been before. It is what he is after his conversion or through his conversion. The great fishes must represent those that are the fruit of the work of God, and we must admit, dear brethren, that we have very few. But we thank God for what we have, at least, I hope we do. I do; for the number here today, the dignity, the spiritual dignity manifest in a number of persons such as are sitting here listening to the word of God, valuing it; valuing the fellowship we are in today. Surely it is a great matter, but it could be greater and it may be greater. It can be greater. God can make it greater. And so I go on to the sheep. The great fishes are one idea. They represent quality and value, value in the eyes of heaven. And the apostles are seen as capable of catching them, although the Lord really did all the work, you might say. He told them where to cast

the net, but they drew the fishes in and the Lord says, "Bring of the fishes which ye have now taken". That is a beautiful thought. If the brethren have any dignity through conversion, coming into the assembly, bring them. Let them be seen. The Lord is waiting to see them. Bring of the fishes which ye have now taken. They are already great. Conversion will make a man great right away, if it is a real conversion. Alas, most of them are not too good! But a real conversion like the conversion of Paul and many others that are mentioned, constitutes the converts great, so that they are able to work at once. Paul was able to go to work almost immediately. The subject of his first preaching was that Jesus is the Son of God. That was the great point, too, for the moment to the Jews, that He is the Son of God. And so, as I said, one is exercised about getting some like that; great by their conversions, an evidence of the power of God -- their conversion and then their subsequent formation so that there is ornamentation and usefulness. There is the word 'great' which is applicable. They are really great. It is only the work of God that can really make a man great. Why not have an eye for it, dear brethren? Aim at something. Fishermen aim at something. All workers of that kind aim at something. What we aim at we may count on God to give us. Not that the apostles were aiming at anything. They did not really know much what they were doing. The Lord did everything. But He says, "Bring of the fishes which ye have now taken". And they brought them, and we are told then that they were great and that they were counted.

Well, that is one thing, and the first thing I mention is that these men were fishers before. They had gone through this experience before, and now they are greater men than they were then; although some of them failed and were now failing in some degree, yet they had not lost their apostleship. They had not

lost their greatness. They were all men of God abstractly. They were levites, workers, and part of the assembly. They had not lost their greatness and the Lord knew they had not lost their greatness, and as far as He was concerned they were not going to lose their greatness, and He at once emphasised their greatness. "Children", He says. And, "the fish which ye have now taken". So that this is the third time. We are not left in this dispensation without this picture of what will mark the coming glories of Christ when He appears in the gathering in of the nations. It is exhilarating to think of the nations, what they will be as depicted in these one hundred and fifty-three great fishes.

And, now, the Lord says, "Come and dine", John 21:12. It is a dining time. It is not simply, Come and eat; you are hungry. That is not the point. The point is it is a dignified time. The Lord would never fail to add dignity to our position. He does not care for us making too much of the hyssop that grows out of the wall. He looks for the idea of the feeders, but it must be a spiritual thought, and so the dining. "Come and dine". There is no word of reproaching Peter until he dined. His dignity stays. The dining is only to re-establish it in his soul; what he is to Christ. He is the real Peter that Christ had in His mind. He had named him; he has not lost his caste. The Lord would emphasise that he is the same Peter, and dining surely is to add to that. He is more dignified now than he was in the morning when he came in without any garment on. When he heard it was the Lord Jesus he said, I have nothing to put on. That is really what he meant. I have nothing to put on. Well, he had something in a coat and he put it on. The idea is, if we are to dine we must be dignified. The dress-suit, so to speak. Pardon the allusion. That does not carry much with it, but it is right. It is the idea of something. Peter had to put on the

best he had. It was not much but he had the sense that he must appear in clothing. We must not be found naked and we must not be found without a wedding garment. Paul says, "that we shall not be found naked", 2 Corinthians 5:3, but it is also serious to be without a wedding garment. You might be clothed without a wedding garment, but in the full dress affair we must have on our wedding garment. A Man comes in and He is the Inspector. He knows what is suitable in the presence of royalty, so that he says, "Bind him feet and hands, and take him away, and cast him out into the outer darkness", Matthew 22:13. Most solemn. That is persons who pretend to be Christians and are not. So that, here we have the idea of dining. If Peter had anything better than the overcoat he would have put it on. If he had had an opportunity to go into a dressing booth he would go in and dress before he sat down before the Lord. Let us not forget that. It is a dress time, but then it is a dining time. That is the point. "Fish laid on it, and bread". That was all that was necessary. The word 'dine' is a full meal. It was not what we call dinner, but it was breakfast really; it was early morning. But it was a full meal. The Lord had it and they dined.

And then the question of heart comes up, which I am not going to enlarge on. It has often been spoken of, but the Lord raised the question after they had dined. In verse 15 it says, "When therefore they had dined, Jesus says to Simon Peter, Simon, son of Jonas, lovest thou me more than these?" All that is just to challenge this boasting of Peter in a very mild way. I might go on and speak quite a little on that point, but it is well known, only it is noticeable that the dining comes first. It is after they had dined. It is no question of the clothes now. It is a question of love, whether you love more than others. And, dear brethren, this is a challenging thing, because there is always this tendency to rivalry

in one way or another. Peter said, "If all shall be offended in thee, I will never be offended", Matthew 26:33. He would profess that he loved the Lord more than others. Perhaps he did, but anyway, the Lord would bring it out, and the Lord brought out from him finally that Peter had to say, Lord, I do not count on You just believing that I love You because You are a divine Person. You are God and You know what is in my heart. He really meant to say, Lord, there is evidence in me that I love You. That is very challenging. Is there any evidence in me that I love the Lord Jesus? He says, "Lord, thou knowest all things; thou knowest that I love thee". That is, You know by what You see. Not simply by divine power, but by what You might use in the sense of evidence. So that Peter says, Lord, You know that there is evidence in me that I love You. That is really what he means in the last word as to this matter of love. And the Lord is satisfied about that. If you can say of the Lord that He knows that you love Him, the Lord would say, I am satisfied; I am not going behind that. I am not going round the corner to see what you have been doing. I am satisfied by what you are and what you do, by the tone of your voice and the way you speak. I am satisfied that you love Me. I am not going to go behind that. I am satisfied with that, and that settles the matter. The Lord settles the matter Himself by accepting Peter's remark. He could see that Peter loved Him. That settled the matter. That brings up the matter of sheep as over against fish. There is no question of dignity when we come to the sheep. They are the same persons, of course, but they are sheep and they are lambs. The point in sheep is largely that they are defenceless persons. Figuratively, they represent the saints as defenceless. "He was led as a lamb to the slaughter, and was as a sheep dumb before her shearers, and he opened not his mouth", Isaiah 53:7.

That is the idea, and that is what the Lord was. He brings in now the lambs and the sheep in addressing Peter as to his love. It is no question of love as to the fish; not that they did not represent the same idea, but it is a question of love, because the sheep represent the Lord in a most peculiar way. They have the same characteristics as the Lord Himself. They are like Himself. "They shall hear my voice", John 10:16. They would not hear the voice of strangers. They will not follow a stranger. That is what the Lord brings out. And so, when He is finishing dining and this matter of the love of Peter comes up, then He says, What is in My heart are these sheep. David says, "But these sheep, what have they done?" 2 Samuel 24:17. And the Lord is saying in His heart in talking to Peter, "These sheep". How many He had who can tell? He says, "They shall never perish". I have laid down My life for them. They are the supreme object of My care now. Not the nations, but these. Now Peter, feed My lambs. Then He says, shepherd, merely. "Shepherd my sheep", John 21:17. He would say in effect, you know you have strayed yourself, Peter, and you are a real sheep. You strayed, so that there is no guarantee that others may not stray. Who is there here who would not admit the liability of straying, especially young people? How ready to take advantage of an opportunity to do what you should not do. That is straying, turning aside. The word is, "Shepherd my sheep". You cannot apply the word 'shepherd' to fish. It is a remarkable thing that they are not provided for in the deluge. That is another matter, but there it is no idea of feeding them or caring for them. They are caught. But it is the idea of caring for the sheep. "Shepherd my sheep". And Peter is entrusted with that; possibly the Jewish sheep. That was possibly the immediate application of the word, for he was the apostle of the circumcision, but

nevertheless, they were sheep. And then finally, "Feed my sheep". Feed them. You say, Where shall I get the food? Well, that is for Peter to determine. He had been with the Lord for a long time and he knew what the Lord did and he ought to know, and the Lord implies that. You know. You know what you needed and what I supplied to you. Now you do the same. First, "Shepherd my sheep", and then "Feed my sheep".

That brings out, dear brethren, the generality of the saints; not simply the distinguished ones I have been speaking of. That is an important matter, the distinguished ones. I have been thinking of the elders. We are to call the elders when we are sick. Call the elders. They are the distinguished ones; not the ordinary ones. Therefore, what is in mind here is the generality of the saints; old and young, rich and poor, lame and halt, sick and well. That is the idea. Every one of them is to be the subject of love and care that flows out of love and that flows out of experience with the Lord Jesus as to what He does; how He has dealt with ones; how He would have many to deal with the brethren viewed in their generality as sheep and as lambs, the diminutive thought, little sheep. The Lord does not say to Peter, Shepherd them. It is for their parents to look after them, for that is the office really, not that the Lord did not, for He took little children in His arms, but here He omits care of the lambs. He has in mind that parents should have some care for them. Never let them out of your sight, if you can. Be an example to them. But then, the Lord does not tell Peter to shepherd the lambs; He says, "Shepherd my sheep". The grown-ups need shepherding. He finishes with the word, "Feed my sheep". And Peter takes it on. He is given that charge. He had a charge from the Lord. He had the keys. The Lord gave him the keys, a great matter. It is another

matter altogether. He gave Peter the keys of the kingdom; not of the house, but the kingdom. Peter had those keys, a very great charge; and now, alongside of that charge, he has the feeding of the lambs and the care of the sheep and the feeding of the sheep. It is the generality of the saints, and so it is that the Lord is helping us in these general meetings and in all our meetings. They are a provision that He has made Himself in His wisdom, and the brethren are taking advantage of them under the merciful sovereign care of God. The brethren seem to have awaked to the value of these meetings, and they are being held twice as often as they used to be. The brethren seem to like to come. They are occasions of dignity and good and care. So, I commend all this, dear brethren, to the saints for consideration, so that we may proceed on these lines in these meetings.

WASHING

Titus 3:4 - 6; Revelation 22:14,15

J.T. What is in mind is to consider a little the scriptural suggestion of washing. These two scriptures were read, but only as basic. There are really others that will come under review. This time of the year tends greatly to affect the brethren, especially the young ones, because of conditions at resorts for bathing and the like. They tend to pollute and the brethren become weaker spiritually and need the application of washing in view of the service of God the first scripture read deals with the subject. It says, "But when the kindness and love to man of our Saviour God appeared, not on the principle of works which have been done in righteousness which we had done, but according to his own mercy he saved us through the washing of regeneration and renewal of the Holy Spirit", Titus 3:4,5. There are three things mentioned or used in the gospel, used by God and announced in the gospel here: washing, applied in relation to regeneration; and then the renewal of the Holy Spirit, so that the subject of the gospel enters into what is before us; and then in Revelation the application as to not one washing, not one primary washing, but continuous washing in view of defilement contracted.

A.R. There is a footnote to the word 'washing'. It says, "a new state of things or a change of position". Will you explain that a little bit for us?

J.T. The washing of regeneration is given in the note: Washing is right here. It is a bath, or the water for it. 'Regeneration' is not the same word as 'being born again', nor is it used so in Scripture. The force of the word is a change of position; a new state of things. The word is only used here and in Matthew 19:28

for the Saviour's coming kingdom. The word 'washing' has to be regarded by itself. It is said to be a bath as we see in the note, and then the word 'regeneration' is a different idea altogether. The word 'washing' which is introduced first in the note, has to be regarded by itself, only allied with regeneration, and then the great thought of the renewal of the Spirit; so that there are three thoughts. The first one is washing. It is not in the daily or constant sense as in Revelation, but a complete thing, such as is involved in new birth. New birth was first introduced as born again, born throughout, without which we cannot see the kingdom of God; but then the Lord gives an additional thought, namely that unless one is born of water and of the Spirit he cannot enter into the kingdom of God. These expressions in John 3 are allied closely to what we have here, only the washing in Revelation 22 is more what the believer sees the need of and applies daily and constantly. He washes, in other words.

A.A.T. The Ethiopian eunuch went into the water, but that was the water of baptism. That was not washing, was it?

J.T. Baptism is washing. It is the principle of it, and is applied to the deluge. Baptism is likened to the deluge, meaning that the earth was cleansed by the process and at the same time the believer goes through water.

A.N.W. Would your second scripture have an external bearing, an outward bearing, and the one we are looking at in Titus more inward?

J.T. I would say that; yes. It is an accompanying thing to Revelation. It is not the application of a bath for washing or cleansing but evidently for water; that is, to cleanse the inner state of a man as regeneration takes place.

W.W.M. Do you think that the application of the death of Christ in the water aspect is suggested

here? Does Naaman suggest anything in this? He was told to go down seven times in the Jordan. It was a water matter there.

J.T. Well, it was; yes. In the antitype, however, I would think it includes redemption. The idea of washing is applied sometimes to sins as well as sin. What we are engaged with now is more sin as a state, describing the state in which man is as unregenerate. But what Naaman needed was more extensive, I would say. It was not simply water, but the Jordan; that is, death was brought into it in a peculiar way; and seven times. But Revelation 22 contemplates water in a constant application because of recurring defilement, but the sins are dealt with, too. We are told in Revelation 1 that the Lord Jesus loved us and washed us from our sins in His own blood, which is another phase of the matter.

J.A.P. Is the kind of state that you are seeking to help us on emphasised in chapter 1? The Cretans were liars, evil wild beasts, and lazy gluttons, Titus 1:12. What you are stressing now meets that kind of thing.

J.T. They represent man in a certain state. These were given to a low state and conduct. No doubt the use of the word 'washing' would bear on that. Sometimes you get a golden thread but it bears on a particular circumstance, and no doubt the Cretan condition was in mind.

R.W.S. Whereas the regenerate would be the positive position brought in following the washing?

J.T. I would say it is an accompanying, correlative thought. Washing is mentioned first, as if it was the one thing that ought to be stressed with such people as the Cretans. There are grades in the human race; grades of wickedness. Some persons follow a more respectable course but others wallow in the filth of this world, and the idea of washing has to be stressed to meet the condition; and so with the Corinthians: they needed the cross; that is what they needed

because they were making something of learning, and what they were in that sense. The apostle says, "For I did not judge it well to know anything among you save Jesus Christ, and him crucified", 1 Corinthians 2:2. Then he proceeds to enlarge on the cross. He is dealing with man as at Corinth. And so, as it were, with the Galatians it would be a legal thing; the legal side of the world where ethics and the like are applied and insisted upon.

A.N.W. I wondered whether that was not the point here largely, rather than evil things. "Not on the principle of works which have been done in righteousness which we had done". Even that is to be offset by God's own mercy.

J.T. That is stated. There is no doubt there is a suggestion as to the low habits of the Cretans -- always liars; a remarkable thing. No doubt that was in the apostle's mind. There are other things, of course. In fact the gospel, you might say, is fully in mind in the chapter.

Ques. Would the thought of self-judgment enter into both of these scriptures, or is that a different thought altogether?

J.T. It would be in mind, because it is a question of washing. There is something to be washed, you know; that is, to be purified, and that would imply there is something of God that is affected; but at the same time the work of God in regeneration does not meet the whole matter. It needs the principle of washing. Regeneration is a new beginning; a new start, and washing is more negative, to remove something that is polluted.

C.N. So that verse 3 of our chapter is connected, is it not, with verse 4? Verse 3 says, "For we were once ourselves also without intelligence, disobedient, wandering in error, serving various lusts and pleasures, living in malice and envy, hateful, and hating one another. But when the kindness and love to man of

our Saviour God appeared, not on the principle of works which have been done in righteousness which we had done, but according to his own mercy he saved us through the washing of regeneration and renewal of the Holy Spirit".

J.T. Yes; he brings in these three things as stressed. He could bring others in. He speaks of other things that could have been covered by other features of the gospel; but we must not forget the need that exists. It is a sort of inner thing. Of course, it continues all the time -- pollution in the world -- but this season of the year greatly accentuates it, and it is lightly thought of, perhaps; whereas in truth these places defile us. We hardly realise it, and may be unable through the experience to take on the service of God.

R.W.S. Is there a link between being born of water and this washing?

J.T. I think so. That is what I was thinking. The Lord adds that in the second word about new birth. If we look at chapter 3 of John, we shall see, perhaps, how the matter stands. After Nicodemus remarks, the Lord's answer is, "Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except any one be born anew", and that word 'anew' is 'throughout'. It is a thorough matter. But it is positive, too. "Verily, verily, I say unto thee. Except any one be born anew he cannot see the kingdom of God", John 3:3. That is the first answer. Now Nicodemus comes back with another suggestion: "How can a man be born being old? Can he enter a second time into the womb of his mother and be born? Jesus answered, Verily, verily". That is the second "verily, verily", here, "Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except any one be born of water and of Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God", John 3:4,5. So that water is introduced in the Lord's second answer and is to remind Nicodemus that it was not only that the idea of new birth should

take place by the Spirit -- but that man was polluted and the idea of washing had to apply basically. So that he would be cleansed in his mind and affections. But it does not go so far as what we have in Titus, because in Titus we have the added thought of renewal of the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit effects new birth and applies the water, but then there is the additional thought of the presence of the Spirit; the reception of the Spirit; the renewal of the Holy Spirit which God shed on us abundantly.

A.R. Would it be like a new man for a new sphere?

J.T. That is right; a new man inclusive, not only of the positive effect of the Spirit, but the washing; that is, purification.

A.R. You do not bring any impurities in amongst the saints.

J.T. That is the idea. We are just calling attention to the unclean state of things that we cannot but be aware of at this season of the year, and whether it is taken account of and met in our souls by the provision of the water; because there are two elements: the water and the blood. The water is for cleansing the inward state.

A.A.T. I did not get your meaning about the season of the year.

J.T. It is a season in which we attend those resorts or bathing places which are full of people and are unclean, peculiarly so; and the brethren go there with little thought of that and they are unable, at least in measure, to carry on the service of God unless the water is applied specifically in view of the conditions.

A.P.T. Ananias said to Paul, "Arise and get baptised, and have thy sins washed away, calling on his name", Acts 22:16. What do you think he had in his mind there? Would there be any link with this?

J.T. It would be a question of what he had been going on with. He says 'sins' there. That is, the law had been broken for hundreds of years and Paul came in on that. He was peculiarly guilty because he was violent in attacking Christ in it. He had to deal with his past history; not only his personal sins, although they were especially in mind, but the whole nation was in mind in the guilt of a broken law, and was he to continue in that? Why was he delaying? It would seem as if he was loth to leave the Jewish system. "Have thy sins washed away". That is, it would be true baptism; the death of Christ in the sense of water.

Ques. Would the washing in John 13 have any bearing on what you are speaking of?

J.T. Yes; it would. It is a more refined thought, because they were already washed. They were already clean, as the Lord Himself says, "by reason of the word which I have spoken to you", but what was meant in the water that the Lord used is the new order of things which He was about to introduce and which they were to be brought into. It was to have part with Him. He says, "Unless I wash thee, thou hast not part with me", John 13:8. It is a very high elevated side of our subject.

A.R. The man in John 9 was told to go and wash his eyes.

J.T. That was to clean off the mud that had been applied. The Lord anointed his eyes with mud. He spat on the ground and made mud of the spittle and told the man to go to Siloam and wash. It was a process all included in the death of Christ, so that he saw. He says, "I washed and I see", John 9:15.

R.W.S. Does this first scripture bear on the bathing resorts, or is it the second scripture or both? I am not just clear because I can see the washing of the robes is what I must do, but this washing in Titus -- is not that done to us?

J.T. It would be an act of God, as you might say, to begin with, only that it is a necessity that is felt and accepted. That man not only gets his sins dealt with, as forgiven, but his state is dealt with; and the first word that is used is the washing. The Cretans needed their state dealt with. It could only be in effect by the death of Christ, because that is the only means of cleansing, whether it be from sins or from sin. Therefore, the two features are found or appear in the death of Christ. The first is the blood, which deals with our sins, and then the water which deals with the state. John speaks in his epistle of the water first.

A.A.T. I notice an interesting reference to washing and bathing in Numbers 19 about the red heifer. In verse 19 it says, "and he shall wash his garments, and bathe himself in water, and shall be clean at even. And the man that is unclean, and doth not purify himself, that soul shall be cut off from the midst of the congregation". All the thoughts are woven in there.

J.T. They are. The first thought you allude to is what the man who slays the heifer has to do. It was an office he fulfilled, but he was rendered unclean because the thought was defiling. Therefore, he had to wash and be unclean until the evening. And so the priest had to wash, too. These are official thoughts, but the main thought that you mentioned last is the person who touches a dead body. He is not told to wash in the same sense. The point that is made as to him is that his guilt will be if he does not wash, and the water that he washes with is mixed with the ashes of the red heifer. Water is applied mixed with the ashes. It is not that he is guilty because he touches a dead body. Of course, that defiles him, but his guilt would be if he refrains from washing; applying what God provided for his cleansing, which is kept with the people all the time. The

ashes are kept purposely for that. It is a unique sort of thing and, of course, it enters into this; but we will not get through with our point if we touch all the washings, because Solomon's system had a sea. It held two thousand baths and ten layers, showing how wide the subject is.

R.M. What is your thought as to "he saved us" in this connection?

J.T. It is just to bring out the gospel as Paul intended it to be applied at Crete.

R.M. It is not connected with eternal salvation, is it? It is for the active thing down here.

J.T. We can hardly omit that; "according to his own mercy he saved us". And I think the great general thought of salvation is implied; hence Paul says, "to us who are saved". The word 'saved' here would have that force.

A.R. I have wondered if we do not stress the word 'salvation' too much in connection with our sins before God whereas salvation is more in connection with the earth, saved from things down here.

J.T. It is, but at the same time the word 'saved' here is very wide. It implies that we are just saved from everything from which we have to be saved, so that "he saved us through the washing of regeneration and renewal of the Holy Spirit, which he poured out on us richly through Jesus Christ our Saviour". We need that, too. The word 'salvation' is a very wide word. It implies that we are saved from everything we have to be saved from, whether it be our sins or our state or the world, or the judgment of God. We need salvation from the judgment of God.

J.S. Involving a change in position.

J.T. Quite so.

A.N.W. In Luke it is definitely put in connection with the service of God. I am struck with your remark that what you are frowning on definitely hinders the service of God, but we are saved from our

enemies that we might serve Him; serving Him all the days of our life.

J.T. You can see the word is very wide, and it involves the judgment of God. We have to be saved from that. But what we are at now -- it would be well to confine ourselves to it, because as a rule the time runs away at these meetings and we, perhaps, sometimes miss what we had in mind. This idea of the washing of regeneration is very forceful as entering basically into our moral being; that the unconverted man is defiled in his very words. He is not particular whether he uses a defiled word or expression or profane expression. This principle introduced into the believer changes him and makes him different from the unconverted man, the ordinary worldling.

J.S. You can see a basic change.

J.T. It is basic. It is inserted in connection with new birth in John 3 and with regeneration in this chapter.

A.N.W. While it is God who does it, is it not the thought of the scripture that it has a purifying effect? It has a reaction on ourselves in regard of what God has done.

J.T. If it is in your being or in your nature, then it shows itself, and if it does not show itself it is either that you are not converted at all or you are defiled.

A.P.T. So that one feels in oneself that in going to the beaches, finding some excuse for it in children and what not, this chapter would show me whether my moral being recoils from the unregenerate character of things present.

J.T. If it does not your conversion is questionable. It is questionable for the moment, anyway; if I am not conscious of the character of the defilement you just question my state. So that the Christian recoils. If he has to go -- well, he has to go and God will help him if he is exercised about it. But if I go there without any exercise like the worldlings I get defiled.

P.E. To get some practical help for the younger ones, it is not the bathing you are speaking of, but the surroundings.

J.T. It is the surroundings, and all that enters into it.

A.R. You hear people say there is no harm in this and no harm in that, but there is a great deal of harm in bad associations. That is where defilement comes in.

R.W.S. Is regeneration a family thought?

J.T. The way it is used in Matthew 19 refers to the millennium and, of course, points out the great change that will come about. What a change will come about if this principle is applied to millions of people as compared with what there is now. There is no change at all except in a few individuals, but then it will be general. It is called regeneration as applied in the coming day, the coming world.

F.S.C. Do you connect it here with the word 'man' in verse 4?

J.T. "But when the kindness and love to man of our Saviour God appeared". It is a question of the philanthropy of God. It is not translated that way, but that is what is meant. It is the love of God to man; not the love of God to angels or cows or any being, but man. That is what is in mind.

J.S. Love unsolicited.

J.T. It would be that. The word 'philanthropy' is a good word.

F.S.C. Does regeneration apply to man?

J.T. It does, but there is more than that here. The word that you are calling attention to -- the expression "love to man" is really philanthropy. It is God's consideration for man. It includes the gospel; that is, what God is doing for man. Some people may show a little philanthropy for men in a town or an institution or something like that, but God embraces the whole race of man in His movement

in Christ. It was a big thing, you know, but it is a love matter with Him, but love in that sense. It is applied as philanthropy is applied.

R.M. Is there something of that in the scripture mentioned here? Our Saviour God and then Jesus Christ our Saviour?

J.T. Just so. You can see that in verse 6. Salvation is involved in that.

R.M. It is connecting two divine Persons with the thought of the Saviour. How does that apply?

J.T. God has come in in love to man; but, notice, it is love to man; not love to angels, but love to man. He has come in in that way, and the love would take care of everything man needed. It does not rise to the counsels of God but just in the sense of philanthropy.

R.W.S. Are these three items of this philanthropy?

J.T. I would think they are very essential. That is what is stressed; the washing and the regeneration and the Holy Spirit. These are grand thoughts. "Shed on us" is the final word as to the Spirit; it is shed on us. It is like Romans 5:5, "The love of God is shed abroad in our hearts by the Holy Spirit which has been given to us".

A.R. Would you say something about the renewal of the Holy Spirit?

J.T. That is the third great thing: your renewed state. Of course, the washing tends to renew, and the regeneration tends to renew, but the Spirit is a great general thought in the sense of renewal; the dispensation is freshened and kept fresh throughout by the Spirit.

A.N.W. The pouring out was at Pentecost, as you may say, but throughout the whole dispensation there is the renewal.

J.T. That is the idea. It brings out what a great thing Christianity is; how the philanthropy of God

considered for Him and in effect brought about the dispensation in its richness.

A.R. Renewal is going on in me all the time; something fresh every day.

J.T. Well, yes. It is the renewal of the Holy Spirit that is going on all the time. The Spirit has not only come in; He has come in for the duration, you may say, of the dispensation. He has come in for the duration, but He is active all the time, and that is what the word 'renewal' implies. It is a freshened thought; but what we are at now is the washing; that the saints get washed. Basically, they are at conversion, but we now want to get the application of the washing which is in the last passage read, "Blessed are they that wash their robes, that they may have right to the tree of life, and that they should go in by the gates into the city", Revelation 22:14. Notice -- if the brethren have not got the New Translation they will not follow what I am reading. It is not a question of keeping the commandments, but washing. It is a great principle in the book of Revelation, and begins with the Lord washing us from our sins in His own blood, which is very touching. And then we have in chapter 7 a great multitude that no one could count who washed their robes. They have done it themselves, but they have done it with the blood of the Lamb; not with water, but with the blood of the Lamb. Here because it is a question of the believer washing, so that he may have a right to the tree of life and that he should go in by the gates into the city.

A.R. You would think brethren would come into fellowship under those circumstances. People who wash have a right to break bread.

J.T. Quite so.

A.P.T. "Wash their robes". How do you apply "their robes"?

J.T. The externals, I would say. Robes or our clothes are intended to convey external things, so that anything of that character about you is pure. External things would, refer to associations; not things at a distance but near things.

A.D. Would it be things that door-keepers could take account of?

J.T. Yes; it would. That is a point that helps us, because they have a right to the tree of life and go in by the gates into the city, and of course, the gates have gate-keepers.

W.C.R. If there has been defilement through bad associations or going to the beaches, is it not the service of the Holy Spirit that brings it to bear upon our conscience?

J.T. You ought to bring it to bear yourself. I mean to say, the sense of responsibility is not that the Holy Spirit does a thing. If I am to do it, do it; and you get the material; you get the appliances, what is needed. It is a question of what you do.

W.C.R. I meant the difference in a person in whom there is a work of God and a person in whom there is not a work of God.

J.T. The washing of regeneration in Titus is basic. It belongs to the constitution, as it were, of the believer, but this verse in Revelation says a person is blessed because he washes. "Blessed are they that wash". We cannot just say it is a question of the Spirit washing. It is not that. It is a question of the person. First you think of the materials for washing; the facilities and that, but it is not a question of God doing it for us or the Spirit doing it for us. It is what we do but the appliances are provided.

F.H.L. Can we not link this with 1 Corinthians 11? Would not this characteristic of washing link up with proving oneself in relation to the Supper?

J.T. "But let a man prove himself, and thus eat", 1 Corinthians 11:28. Yes.

A.N.W. "That they may have right". There is an objective in doing it. "That they may have right to the tree of life, and that they should go in by the gates into the city". The washing has a definite objective in it.

J.T. It is a means to an end. You want to partake of the tree of life. You want to go in, but not clandestinely; not to climb in as some did, but go in by the gates, openly and transparently.

A.N.W. So that the gates may ask questions that they never asked before.

J.T. Quite so.

R.W.S. Would Simon Magus in Acts 8 be like one who was washing his robes ostensibly but as it says here, did not have the washing of regeneration?

J.T. The idea of regeneration does not enter into this at all. Of course, it is a new man; but that is not the point; nor is it a question of blood here. It is this thing that is done; not that it has been done, but that it is being done. The word is in the present: "Blessed are they that wash". Not that have washed, but that do it. "That they may have right". They have an intelligent reason for it. They are bound up in the thing. They cannot afford, as it were, to be denied these things. I may deny myself of these things unless I wash, but if I value them I will see to it that I wash.

R.W.S. So that the inside and the outside must be consistent.

J.T. Just so. The beginning is God's work; the washing at the beginning is God's work, at new birth. It is a basic thing. You acquire the thought of being clean. It is not exactly holiness; it is purity. God has given you that element in your constitution, and He looks for it. You do have it. It comes up when anything happens in your conversation; lying and

the like. You discern it and immediately you settle it. But this passage here implies all that, but it implies an emergency condition; a condition that has arisen and has to be settled at once, because you deny yourself of these great privileges; that is, having part in the tree of life and entering in by the gates.

G.L. Had Dorcas neglected the matter in Acts 9? Washing is applied by others.

J.T. What is your thought? Is it that she was a garment maker or that she needed to be washed when she died?

G.L. I never have been able to understand why the principle should have to be applied to Dorcas in that state.

J.T. Do you mean when she died she had to be washed?

G.L. Yes. Is it a service by others in that sense?

J.T. I suppose it was a necessity for the manner of the Jews, so to speak. It is what they did. Let us see who did it. It does not say Peter ordered it. "And it came to pass in those days that she grew sick and died; and, having washed her, they put her in the upper room", Acts 9:37. You see there who did that. There were several people around. I suppose it would be the custom to wash a dead person. I do not think there is anything moral in that at all. Anyway, there it is. "But Lydda being near to Joppa, the disciples having heard that Peter was there, sent two men to him, beseeching him, Thou must not delay coming to us. And Peter rising up went with them, whom, when arrived, they brought up into the upper chamber; and all the widows stood by him weeping and shewing him the body-coats and garments which Dorcas had made". Those that washed her would be similar to those. There is no question as to the moral necessity as far as I can see. It was, I suppose, custom. But when he arrived, it says, "But Peter, putting them all out". Of course he does not say, you should not

have washed her, but what was needed was life. She was to be raised from the dead. "And, turning to the body, he said, Tabitha, arise. And she opened her eyes, and, seeing Peter, sat up", Acts 9:40. I do not think there is anything in the washing.

G.L. I never understood it. I never thought that we should not be able to apply spiritually any thought in Scripture. Should we not seek a spiritual application? Does not the process of her dying suggest a moral process that might have been consequent upon the neglect of washing?

J.T. I do not think there is anything in it except that it was suitable in the ordinary way. She would have opened her eyes after she had been washed in that case.

J.A.P. We need to value our robes. The robes of the priests had a pomegranate and a bell around the hem of the garment, Exodus 28:33. The maintenance of that is something precious to the service of God basically; that there should be a good ring and fruitfulness.

J.T. Very good. The pomegranate and the bell would mean when the priest went in or went out he made a sound. All that should be in the gathering when we come in. Suppose we are down at the beach and come into the prayer meeting on a Monday; we do not, I hope, go to the beach on Sunday -- but suppose we go down on Monday and come into the prayer meeting from the beach -- I doubt very much if there will be a good ring of the bell or much pomegranate. Anyway, it is not that it is not possible, for if one judges himself he has right. He can do that if he is right with God, but is there not a danger of damaging the prayer meeting by that? Is not the idea of fasting necessary to avoid any damage to the service of God?

C.N. Do you think we lack in consciousness as to these surroundings that we are apt to be defiled by? In Crete there are conditions there that necessitated

this washing, and then in Revelation the next verse speaks about these persons that are outside. I wondered whether we are not lacking in being made conscious of these environments that we often have to meet. If you were more conscious of them you would be more intelligent as to the need of washing.

J.T. Just so. If you have to go to the beach or a place like that -- you have to in business matters -- but then, do we have to go? We are endangering ourselves when we go. Here we have the kind of people: "Without are the dogs, and the sorcerers, and the fornicators, and the murderers, and the idolaters, and every one that loves and makes a lie". They sit around there and read novels and maybe make them. I am only referring to one but it is a common thing and we think there is nothing in that. But can you come to the prayer meeting and join in in that?

A.A.T. You are referring to public bathing places, but are there not private places where you are free from the worldly elements?

J.T. I would not like to be legal at all, but I have been here for half a century and I know pretty well what happens. There are not many that you speak of but then if there is, of course, what can we say? Go there and keep yourself clean, by judging yourself, but generally, how can you do it? When the beaches have become what they are today, how can you do it?

A.A.T. I think your word has a direct application to brethren who live here in the east, but in the centre of the United States and Canada there are no beaches.

J.T. Well, they have lakes and they are just as bad. I know some who have been damaged, seriously, too.

A.P.T. Do you think Lot was one that was saved under certain conditions but he would hardly be a

worshipper? It says, he settled down. Do you think he is one that did not seem to care about the service of God? Do you think he would enter much into the service of God according to the scriptural record? It says in Peter, he settled down. I wondered if his salvation was really only in the blood side in that sense. Would not the scriptural record of his life bar him in the true sense of the word from the holiness pertaining to it?

J.T. It is doubtful whether he would have any part in it. The only thing that can be said to his credit is that he had unleavened bread in his house, Genesis 19:3. He is the first one said to have had it. It is suggestive that Lot was singled out in that sense. Peter says, "Lot ... tormented his righteous soul day after day with their lawless works", 2 Peter 2:8. But could he not get away from that? That is the question often that comes up in regard to Lot -- his righteous soul. It seems to me the Spirit of God is very liberal and generous in speaking of him as a righteous man, but did he have to remain with them all the time? It would look as if he was a very 'hail-fellow-well-met' with the inhabitants of Sodom.

A.P.T. That verse is just the verse I have in mind. Another rendering says he settled down. I wondered as to whether I may become hard in listening to all these things and not move out of them. If not, how can I take much part in the prayer meeting or service of God? I do not see how I can, effectively.

J.T. I think there are ways and means of getting out of the way of those things. I do not think Lot used the means that were available. For instance, he calls the inhabitants of Sodom his brethren. He seemed to be on hearty terms with them; and when the men of God, that is, the angels come he took them into his house. They were very hesitant about going in, but he constrained them and they went in, and he set

unleavened bread before them, which is a great credit to him. But why should there be such a state and he not know it was there? They came from every part of the city to attack him when the angels were found to be there. It is remarkable; as if God would expose the relations that he had maintained, and yet God covers him, as much as possible, through Peter in calling him a righteous man.

R.D. As doorkeepers, how much intelligence should we look for as to those coming into fellowship?

J.T. If you are thinking of the city that is alluded to here, the city is glowing with intelligence, glowing with heavenly-mindedness, and everything that you would expect in the city is there. There is nothing missing. Every gate is one pearl. You may be sure that these gate-keepers would be ready for anyone who drew near and would detect any garment that had not been washed. It might be good quality, but the point is not the quality but the washing. Do you not think so?

R.D. I think we need help as to the intelligence we should look for, especially in the young people, do you not?

J.T. I do. The elders would be able to instruct them. The real difficulty is just that -- the gate-keepers, the door-keepers -- they ought to be elders. In truth, that is what they would be and how can we hope to get on together and save the youth unless there are those who know how to detect those elements of unwashed garments? We have to detect them and then to speak of them.

A.R. There is a difficulty keeping them after they get in.

J.T. That is another thing, but this applies, too, even if they are in. This applies, because it is a question of the blessedness of the person. "Blessed are they that wash their robes, that they may have

right to the tree of life, and that they should go in by the gates into the city". That would be at any time.

T.E.H. Would David be a man like that? After he washed his robes and came into the city, he says, "I will teach transgressors thy ways, and sinners shall return unto thee", Psalm 51:13. He would be a man that washed his robes constantly.

J.T. Just so.

Ques. Is it the local responsibility to insist strenuously on these things, as in verse 8?

J.T. I am sure that is the word; strenuous insistence on these things. I know well enough the difficulty of entering into it because we are all in it, and if we approach it in this sense as the Scriptures require God will help us and perhaps we will lose less, because the losses are rather serious and they come about just in this way: defilement acquired in bad associations, etc., and then we have to say we cannot go on with you.

A.N.W. Genesis says it is the flame of the flashing sword. It seems to be in accord with the gate here.

J.T. Cherubim, it says. It is the government of God.

A.P.T. It is said in Psalm 87:2 that God loves the gates of Zion. There must be something lovable in our local administration carried out according to Him.

J.T. How pleasurable it is. On care meeting nights -- how pleasurable they are to God. He knows that we are concerned about these matters.

F.H.L. Is it not very striking that this last paragraph comes in between verses 12 and 16, as if it is a last hour challenge?

J.T. Yes; the list of things given of those that are without. How solemn it is that people leave the brethren because they do not find these things there. They go to where they can find them. But how

remarkable -- the character is that they are without and without forever.

J.A.P. Should we look for this in persons coming into fellowship, that they should know how to wash themselves? A child growing up has to be taught to wash itself.

J.T. Just so.

A.Pf. It applies to every Christian.

J.T. It does, but peculiarly to the youth. We could go over the Scriptures and point out these things, because the Scriptures are full of them. "And remember thy Creator in the days of thy youth", Ecclesiastes 12:1.

F.S.C. The Lord says He has a few names in Sardis that have not defiled their garments.

J.T. That is another point that enters into this. We are alluding to Christendom. Protestantism really is in mind in Sardis, and the fact that there is such a scarcity of white garments in that church is very suggestive of the conditions that are around us. "I know thy works, that thou hast a name that thou livest, and art dead ... . But thou hast a few names in Sardis which have not defiled their garments, and they shall walk with me in white, because they are worthy", Revelation 3:1 - 4.

A.Macd. Do you think this was the secret of Joseph's blessing? As a young man he had no part in evil speaking. He had no part with the evil in Potiphar's house.

J.T. Very good. One has often thought of that, how in the book that treats of fathers -- because Genesis is really a father's book, an old man's book, I mean, they predominate -- you have introduced into that a young man, seventeen years of age, and this is what marks him. How he took account of his own brother's evil communications and then in Potiphar's house he was true to the principles of purity and

suffered for it. He is an example for us and especially for the young at the present time.

R.D.G. Is there not a difference between the exercise of maintaining one's garments without defilement and then washing them if they become defiled?

J.T. That is good. This verse would suggest that the person in mind has had to do it and does it. He knows something about the defilement, because it is not keeping himself from the evil so much as discerning that he has done it. "Blessed are they that wash their robes". It is that side.

R.D.G. Whereas in Sardis it is this: "Thou hast a few names ... which have not defiled their garments".

J.T. I would think the allusion would be to religious circles or religious associations in Sardis. They have not got the assembly truth, but they are equal to it, ready for it, I would say. No doubt we could, perhaps, discern them in the history of the assembly; the history that we have -- these names; some of them, anyway. Some of them whose hymns we have and who stood out against religious evil particularly. They did not defile their garments. It would appear as if they stood out throughout the whole period.

A.B. In Laodicea they are exhorted to have white garments, as if they were not white.

J.T. The Lord speaks to them as buying them from Him. "I counsel thee to buy of me gold purified by fire, that thou mayest be rich; and white garments, that thou mayest be clothed, and that the shame of thy nakedness may not be made manifest", Revelation 3:18, as if they were not suitable for fellowship, as we speak. It is remarkable in those who have suffered in Revelation how they are recompensed for having to wait a little longer for the final resurrection by getting white garments. The Lord recompenses them; as if awaiting the full result in resurrection He gives them a white garment. He says in

Revelation 6:9, "And when it opened the fifth seal, I saw underneath the altar the souls of them that had been slain for the word of God, and for the testimony which they held; and they cried with a loud voice, saying, How long, O sovereign Ruler, holy and true, dost thou not judge and avenge our blood on them that dwell upon the earth? And there was given to them, to each one a white robe; and it was said to them that they should rest yet a little while, until both their fellow-bondmen and their brethren, who were about to be killed as they, should be fulfilled". It looks as if the Lord would say, I know you valued the white robe when you lived, and I know you will value the thought until you are raised. So that that is the reward they have for waiting a little while for the full result.

R.W.S. In Revelation 7:14 to which you alluded, it says, "These are they who come out of the great tribulation, and have washed their robes, and have made them white in the blood of the Lamb". There is no cleansing agent mentioned in the scripture read in Revelation 22. Why is that? The blood is used in the two references in Revelation 1 and Revelation 7; here it is just the washing.

J.T. Therefore, I think it is implied that it is a continuous thought. It is not the blood but the water. The application of the blood is once for all. "Who ... has washed us from our sins in his blood", Revelation 1:5. But here the Spirit tells us they did that themselves. They must have acquired that thought of doing it. But Revelation 22, I think, must allude to continuous washing, which has its own teaching in the Scriptures and it means the water.

T.W. Might that involve something I may see or hear causing evil thoughts? Would that be such an item that would require the washing?

J.T. Your state is the point. Of course, it involves confession and, therefore, it comes under

the heading of individual sins, but with the sense of being defiled by them. Confession brings relief at once, as in Peter's case, Matthew 26:75. He went out and wept bitterly. I am sure that brought relief to his conscience. He needed washing, but the Lord saw to that, in appearing to him; and then in John 21 He probed him so that he is relieved wholly from the thing.

THE KINGDOM OF GOD IN ROMANS

Romans 1:1 - 7; Romans 5:20,21; Romans 14:7 - 18

J.T. The proposal is to look at these scriptures in order to have before us something of the kingdom, the kingdom of God. It is an ever present necessity to have it in mind, because of the need of rule; the need of it especially in young people, and inclusive of subjection to one another. Therefore, the first chapter is read because it calls attention to obedience, and the kingdom is suggested, too, in the allusion to David. It is said, "come of David's seed". And then chapter 5 was read because it speaks of grace reigning: "go also grace might reign". And then chapter 14 is a formal allusion to the kingdom and what it is. That is, Revelation 14:16 says, "Let not then your good be evil spoken of; for the kingdom of God is not eating and drinking; but righteousness, and peace, and joy in the Holy Spirit". And then it adds, "For he that in this serves the Christ is acceptable to God and approved of men", showing how practical the thought is in this epistle. We are to serve in it. This epistle being addressed to the Romans is not without significance, because law had acquired a peculiar place in that empire as compared with the other three monarchies, and the Spirit of God would seize the fact to enforce law, only on the saints in the true sense of it. We are told in chapter 12 that love is the fulfilling of the law, but it works out in this wide way.

C.A.M. You were going to stress the matter of obedience in chapter 1?

J.T. Just in relation to that, because it is found several times in the form in which it is seen here: "for obedience of faith among all the nations", Romans 1:5. It is not simply that young Christians are instructed

in the principle of law, for that is in mind in the schools and colleges and the like, but obedience of faith. The principle of law in the Roman empire would have subjection in mind but there was no idea of faith, so the kingdom of God is, therefore, introduced and it involves the obedience of faith.

C.A.M. Would you say that speaking in a general way that stands over against the first act of displeasure to God? It was disobedience.

J.T. So that we have the contrast there in chapter 5, have we not? In Romans 5:19 it says, "For as indeed by the disobedience of the one man the many have been constituted sinners, so also by the obedience of the one the many will be constituted righteous".

A.E.H. Does this idea of faith refer to the vital links with God, between God and the soul, and God in that way getting a great place -- a supreme place in the soul, and the principle of reigning works out of that and the judgments are not formed by circumstances that might arise but, as it says in Isaiah, "He shall not judge after the sight of his eyes, neither reprove after the hearing of his ears; but with righteousness shall he judge the poor, and reprove with equity the meek of the earth", Isaiah 11:3,4? Is that the idea?

J.T. I think that is good. In Psalm 98:2 it is laid down that those in the kingdom would show that God is righteous. "Because he has set a day in which he is going to judge the habitable earth in righteousness by the man whom he has appointed", Acts 17:31. This epistle clearly makes no excuse for itself. It is the introduction of righteousness by faith in us, but the rule is in God. It is God's kingdom. What is required is the obedience of faith. It is God's kingdom and the principle laid down in man is the obedience of faith. It is said that law came in, that is, law in the legal sense -- the law came in that

the offence might abound Romans 5:20. That is, that the exaggeration of lawlessness through the law might make it more imperative that God should rule and that it should be on the principle of faith, not of law.

F.H.L. In Luke 4:18 - 21 the Lord speaks of having been sent forth to announce the glad tidings of the kingdom. Would that be in line with what you are saying as to being in God's kingdom?

J.T. That is what I was thinking. Luke, I suppose, has that in mind -- the kingdom of God.

G.V.D. Would you say Abraham would be a good example of one marked by the obedience of faith as he is spoken of in Hebrews 11? "By faith Abraham, being called, obeyed to go out into the place which he was to receive for an inheritance", Hebrews 11:8. Would that be along that line?

J.T. Quite so. He obeyed.

A.R. We have to learn everything from Christ -- His obedience. He said in Matthew, "Not as I will but as thou wilt", Matthew 26:39. That is the Model, is it not? Chapter 5 of Romans is the new Head.

J.T. Quite so. The Lord leads in everything for us, and certainly leading as to the principle of obedience. It is the crying need especially among the young. And then not only obedience to God and Christ, but obedience to one another; submission to one another, the whole system -- wives being subject to their husbands and the like. The whole system is disrupted in the want of obedience, and this epistle is to enforce it; but it is the obedience of faith.

G.L. Abraham's obedience is all the more remarkable because the law was not given yet.

J.T. Yes. And, of course, Abraham was accounted righteous on the principle of faith, so that he had a great advantage. It is not said of Noah he was accounted righteous by faith, nor of the others before him. This great principle of righteousness by faith

came in by Abraham, but then that faith was accompanied by obedience, as has just been remarked.

A.A.T. When David established his kingdom I suppose all the Israelites had the protection of it. Would faith enter in there?

J.T. That is the reason why I thought it should be introduced. It is introduced in the very outset of Romans; David represents not righteousness by faith but rule. He lays down for us the principle of the kingdom, the principle of rule. "The ruler among men shall be just", 2 Samuel 23:3. Abraham had that principle, but David is raised up to enforce it. And, therefore, his introduction here as in the line of Christ is important; "come of David's seed according to flesh, marked out Son of God in power", Romans 1:3,4. That is the Son is Ruler.

J.T.Jr. Matthew's gospel begins, "Son of David, Son of Abraham", Matthew 1:1, linking both together.

J.T. Very good. That helps, because the assembly is in mind in Matthew, and it is organised rule. Organised rule is in mind in Matthew. So that David is said to be king as he is introduced, and Christ is said to be the Son of David first. "Son of David, son of Abraham".

A.B. Matthew would be the gospel that would help us in regard to our brotherly relations and the maintenance of kingdom principles would be known by us.

J.T. That is why, I suppose, chapter 18 introduces the need of adjustment if there is trespass and the assembly is the final appeal. Matters are concluded in the assembly; things are finalised, which is a most important thing, because the idea is organised rule. Of course, it is in God, it is in Christ, but authority is in the assembly, and even the brethren and the husbands -- indeed all; we are to be subject one to another. I think David would represent the organisation. Of course, Moses does, too. He represents

the kingdom, too. He was king in Jeshurun. That is to say, he was king among the brethren. There is the idea of consideration -- king in Jeshurun.

A.R. There was certain territory that David took where he had to put garrisons. Why was that? Could the persons not be trusted?

J.T. Well, that helps as to what we are saying. He put garrisons in places, because it is a question of organisation. The garrison would be representative of the assembly. David is said to have established his rule or kingdom on the Euphrates. He went to the limit, the utmost boundary, so that we are not to be limited in the principle.

A.E.H. I would like a little help in regard to this matter of obedience. The question naturally arises, obedience to what? And is the principle to which obedience is to be rendered the idea of the supremacy of God? "But his delight is in Jehovah's law", Psalm 1:2. Is that the idea -- obedience to that great principle of the supremacy of God?

J.T. Well, quite. But I think what we have said is important, the thing itself, even if it begins in a brother; the idea itself, in whomsoever it might be righteously exercised; in a husband or even in a brother or sister according to what is there. The word 'obedience' here -- obedience of faith is the thing itself; the idea itself exercised on the principle of faith. That is, that I am subject on the principle of faith.

A.E.H. I am helped in my own soul, whether what I am obedient to is entirely in line with the idea of the supremacy of God or not. I am helped in my own soul on the principle of obedience, anyway.

J.T. That is what I am thinking. The idea of the kingdom is up, up, up, beginning at the bottom. Or you might reverse it and put it at the very top, but it is an organised thing, a systematic thing. So that there was the centurion who was recommended

to the Lord by the Jews. He has built us a synagogue, they said; he is worthy that you should do something for him. And he addresses the Lord and says, You do not need to come to my house to heal my servant; I also am a man under authority. That is, it is delegated authority. I say to my servant, Do this, and he does it. He put that on the Lord. He says, I know you are in that position. That is to be understood. The whole system is impregnated with the idea of obedience, but then corresponding with obedience, rule. There is no use talking about obedience unless there is rule and a ruler, so that we have the two things in this epistle.

A.E.H. I was thinking about what the Lord says to certain in His day. They disregarded the moral proper relationship between parents and children by saying that if their parents were benefited in any way by them, it was on the principle of gift. They owed nothing to their parents. That is what the Lord was striking at there, this principle of disobedience and the setting aside of rule.

J.T. Quite so. I see your point; whereas we owe everything. I mean the system implies that God is supreme, of course, but He is supreme in the system, and what He is supreme in extends down to every person in the system. If it be a brother, according to his ability, he has power to rule. So it is in the army and so it is in business, more or less. The principles are there, but when it comes to children, wife, brother and sister and so on, the obligation is often not recognised.

So I thought we might look at chapter 1 just because of the principle being there; the principle of obedience, without saying to whom it is, and that David is there and sonship is there -- all the qualities that would enforce the thought of obedience. And then in chapter 5, "So also grace might reign". It is not simply ruling but reigning. "So also grace

might reign through righteousness to eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord", Romans 5:21. The thing is finalised in eternal life. Eternal life, of course, involves all this. But grace is on the throne, because the word 'reign' implies a throne. The word 'rule' does not always imply a throne, because persons in the system do not all have thrones. But the principle in rule is according to our measure, but when we come to grace the idea of reigning involves a throne, supremacy.

J.T.Jr. Is grace to suggest that it is not an arbitrary matter? Grace enters into the position of rule in the house or any other position.

J.T. Quite so, and if the end in view is eternal life, well, there is a great moral weapon in that. Whatever measures are used to bring about the obedience, the end is eternal life; not to extol someone or elevate someone, but grace is a principle, not a person, and it is not, therefore, looking for honour. God has made it a principle on the throne and its end is eternal life.

A.R. That can be enjoyed in our houses as well as in the meeting.

J.T. Quite so. But you enjoy it more in the assembly. When the thing is finalised, it is the full thing. In this epistle it is the full thing, the full idea of blessing in which all are satisfied. There is no complaint at all. If eternal life is there, there is no complaint. Every heart is satisfied and grace is content with that, because grace is not looking for any honour. It is not a person; it is a principle, and God has enthroned it.

A.P.T. Abigail was not looking for any honour. She was satisfied that the right man should be at the top.

J.T. The right man; quite so. That is good. The right man happened to be the man she loved eventually, but that was not what was in her mind at

first. It was that the right man should rule, and certainly not her husband. Nabal was his name; that is, he was a fool. We do not want that. Her concern was that the right man should rule, and, of course, David was that. God showed in time that it was that.

J.A.P. When David said to the sons of Zeruiah, "What have I to do with you?" was that grace or was that weakness? Shimei had rebelled against David and the sons of Zeruiah were contending that he should be put to death and David said, "What have I to do with you?" 2 Samuel 19:22.

J.T. That was the point exactly, that he was king and God had ordained that. He had come back to that in fact. The sons of Zeruiah would defeat that. That is an important point because there are those that would defeat that, whereas the principle of the kingdom of God is that it has an end. The result is to be eternal life, but the thought that enters into that is, "Do not I know that I am this day king over Israel?" That is, grace would overcome the difficulties, may they be what they are. It is not mercy; it is grace. Mercy is sovereign but grace overcomes the difficulties and God has, therefore, put not mercy but grace on the throne. Grace takes account of the difficulties and meets them and, therefore, redemption or atonement is brought in to meet them, but the principle is there all the time. The sons of Zeruiah would not admit that, that Shimei could be forgiven and reinstated, but David would do that. He would overcome the difficulties attending Shimei's position.

Rem. The sons of Zeruiah were hard men.

J.T. David had said, "These men, the sons of Zeruiah, are too hard for me", 2 Samuel 3:39. That is the kind of men they were, Joab particularly; but even when a man is hard, or a brother or sister is hard, grace attempts to take up the attitude of being able to meet that, and God is furnishing the means of meeting

that. Redemption furnishes the means of meeting it.

G.L. "My grace suffices thee", the Lord Jesus said to Paul; 2 Corinthians 12:9.

J.T. "My grace", just so. If you put grace on the throne, it will do all in its power, and that power is infinite because redemption supplies the means of meeting conditions.

J.T.Jr. While you say it is not a person, does it not come out in persons?

J.T. Well, it does, but it is put as a principle that the thing might be rightly apprehended; because it comes out to meet you when there are no persons needed. The Spirit of God furnishes things in your soul when there are no persons to help you. The means is in yourself.

F.H.L. Redemption makes it divinely right.

J.T. Redemption supplies the need so that the rights of God are maintained.

A.R. They obeyed from the heart the form of teaching delivered unto them.

J.T. Just so.

A.B.P. Does the principle of justification being brought in in this epistle justify grace, in the sense that while grace stays the judgment, mercy has found a means for justifying the sinner?

J.T. Yes; it is according to mercy. God saves us according to mercy; "but according to his own mercy he saved us through the washing of regeneration and renewal of the Holy Spirit", Titus 3:5. These are the means. Now, in chapter 3 of our epistle it is said, "But now without law righteousness of God is manifested, borne witness to by the law and the prophets; righteousness of God by faith of Jesus Christ towards all, and upon all those who believe: for there is no difference; for all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God; being justified freely by his grace through the redemption which is in Christ Jesus; whom God has set forth", Romans 3:21 - 24.

Grace is the active operational principle. Mercy is, so to say, static. It is a great sovereign element, but grace is the great operational element, and therefore, it is on the throne.

A.E.H. Does grace involve the shining in or coming in of God, revealing Himself in an impossible situation and thus correcting the situation by that unfolding of Himself? Is that the principle of grace?

J.T. Just so. It is, so to say, the static idea in mercy. It is the greatest thing in a sense. But take Pharaoh in Genesis. He was supreme, but he said to Joseph, You will be second to me. Joseph was the operational head and, therefore, the whole system was set in movement, and the result was that all were brought into subjection to Pharaoh. Every person in Egypt was simply bound hands and feet by the operational wisdom of Joseph, and the whole nation and all the people in it were brought into subjection to Pharaoh. And now, if we apply that to Christianity, Christ is the operational Agent; a divine Person, of course, but He brings all into subjection; but it is not to limitation or bondmanship, although that in a certain sense applies, but it is in eternal life. That is, everybody is satisfied. There is no question about it. There is no complaint. Joseph, of course, does not altogether meet it as a type, but it conveys the idea that everybody is brought into subjection to Christ and everybody is satisfied. Everybody rejoiced, because it is not simply subjection but love, and so love is the fulfilling of the law. It is a question of love and love is satisfied.

A.E.H. That is the idea of peace towards God through our Lord Jesus Christ, which involves a constant and daily and real touch in our souls with Christ.

J.T. That is what the verse says that we have just read. "So also grace might reign through righteousness to eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord".

A.E.H. Which is not the idea of a static thing or a channel or a conduit, but an operational idea through our Lord Jesus Christ.

J.T. That is it. Therefore, the idea of supremacy is in Genesis 1 in God coming into His creation. He takes a Name. When it is used first, we are not told, but it is Elohim. Jehovah is added to it, but it was the idea of supremacy, supremacy in the creation; and then the operation comes in. For instance, Noah is a great suggestion of an operator, but it was negative first but resulted in blessing through the burnt-offering, and the whole scene is in principle set up and established for ever in type. "Henceforth, all the days of the earth, seed time and harvest, and cold and heat, and summer and winter, and day and night, shall not cease", Genesis 8:22. The thing is established. That will all be transferred into eternity presently, where God will be all in all. And the Son also is to be in subjection, so that the operational principle remains, but what we have to come to in our souls is the way this works out. We are not a burden to one another. We are a help to one another, and the principle of subjection is permeating everywhere.

C.A.M. I was thinking of what you said about the beginning of Genesis. It was a great help to me when it was stressed in ministry years ago that the second chapter is the filling out of things. There is this static sort of set-up but then this filling out enlarges the whole sphere of things.

J.T. I am glad you brought that up, because chapter 2 brings man in. It brings affection into operation. It is Jehovah Elohim in chapter 2 and man comes in, and God is saying, I am going to ask him to name the animals, as if to give him something to do to show what he could do. God made a creature like that. Well, when that is applied to Christ, it is not a made creature but God Himself in manhood,

and everything is worked out on the principle of perfection.

A.P.T. "Happy are thy men! happy are these thy servants, who stand continually before thee, who hear thy wisdom! Blessed be Jehovah thy God who delighted in thee, to set thee on the throne of Israel!" 1 Kings 10:8,9. Is that a filling out of this kingdom idea of everybody happy?

J.T. Just so. The queen of Sheba is brought up. She saw that. They were her own words. She conveys to us what she saw. She is a witness to what was there, and what every one of us should be a witness to -- what there is in the new system. "Happy are thy men! happy are these thy servants".

F.S.C. Does it seem we have to have the dark picture before we get the bright one? It is that way so often in Scripture. Sin reigned; the power of death is mentioned before grace reigning.

J.T. God allowed the dark thing to come up so as to justify the bright thing when it came in. It enhanced it. Why was the law added a great many years after? To intensify the idea of disobedience so that God is justified in setting it aside, and justified and glorified in bringing in the system of eternal life which makes everybody satisfied and happy.

C.A.M. In that light, would it be right to say that God has allowed sin to abound at the present time, and we know that He is stressing eternal life in a very special way as against it all?

J.T. Just so. If there was no eternal life and no blessing in the end in mind, well, what would there be for us? There would be nothing but darkness. But there is light and a world of blessing.

A.A.T. How do you distinguish between the assembly and the kingdom of God, because the features of the kingdom are presented this afternoon, but it is unto eternal life, and I understand that is in connection with the assembly?

J.T. So it is now. It will not be always just like that, although the principle of eternal life must continue, the principle of it, which meets conditions -- death and sickness and all that, but the assembly is provisionally constituted so as to extend an opportunity for eternal life to manifest itself.

A.B. Verse 19 would help us in what you are saying in regard to it. "For as indeed by the disobedience of the one man the many have been constituted sinners, so also by the obedience of the one the many will be constituted righteous". The principle of the kingdom is the constitution; not what is written in the constitution, but what is indelibly written in the souls of the subjects of the kingdom.

J.T. Just so. It is what they are, so that life had to be brought in. That is one of the things set up here in this epistle; the restitution of righteousness and life.

A.B.P. Would it be right to say that if you want to find a truly happy person you must find an obedient person?

J.T. Well, I would say that. The Lord makes a proposition in Matthew 11. "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", Matthew 11:29. That was what He was. There was no dolefulness about Him. Of course, there was grief and that, but the general principle is the yoke is easy and the burden is light.

C.A.M. Speaking of the happy man being the obedient man, the man in the first Psalm finds delight in meditating day and night in God's law. If it did not act that way, we really would not grow; it would be irksome all the time.

J.T. Well, that is good, to bring up this matter of what you are saying just now, how the brethren are to be happy; but happy in righteousness, and this

book is to do that, to bring about a condition of satisfaction, to resolve the question of righteousness and then life flowing out from that. Other things, of course -- the Holy Spirit the power in it and so on.

F.N.W. Does what we find in the Lord Jesus Himself and His position in subjection help us to be happy in the kingdom? In Genesis Pharaoh says Joseph is to have the second chariot, and then "Bow the knee!" Genesis 41:43, comes after he is given the second chariot.

J.T. Yes; quite so. And then, as we already alluded to Pharaoh, he represents supremacy in Joseph's system. We may speak of it in that way. It was Joseph's system and he was given a name which meant he would be the sustainer of the life of the world. Well now, he has brought all into subjection and evidently all are more or less happy. There is plenty of corn, plenty to meet the need of the body. And the question as to his brethren put them, too, in the general position, because we are in the general position and we shall be eternally in the general position although greater and higher than others. But still when the time comes for the supreme to ask something about his brethren, he selects five of them. He did not bring them all, as if he were to show Pharaoh what he could do; what his administration meant. So it is, I believe, that the Lord will bring us forward. He has His own way of bringing us forward before God, before the Supreme. And they tell Pharaoh just the truth, and they can be used because they tell the truth.

A.B. Do you think many of our difficulties are like those in Joseph's father and brethren -- the refusal to recognise in a brother the qualities that were there in Joseph? "Shall we indeed come ... to bow down ourselves to thee to the earth?" Genesis 37:10. It falsifies the position of the kingdom and we find that in our own hearts. The thing is there in

a very subtle way, not ready to be subordinate to the brethren or to a brother.

J.T. And they all had to come to that. Quite so. These five evidently had come to it.

A.B. They had been despising that.

J.T. The sun, moon and eleven stars, advancing the sphere, the area of subjection, all would bow down to him.

J.T.Jr. The principle of regulation came in there. That idea is to be in the person. "According to thy commandment shall all my people regulate themselves", Genesis 41:40.

J.T. "Regulate themselves", very good.

A.T.D. Their life depended on it. Would that be typical of eternal life?

J.T. That is apparently what his name was: Zaphnath-paaneah, Genesis 41:45, which means, 'Sustainer of the life of the world'. It is accepted by those who should know to mean that and, therefore, the whole universe is dependent on Christ, but it is a question of obedience now. Sin exists, but the element of obedience must be there. So it is that Joseph brought all in on that principle.

F.H.L. God will be completely vindicated in the millennium in relation to the One He has appointed.

J.T. Just so. He has appointed the day, and the next thing is the Man, and He has given assurance to all men so that we know about our vote. God has given assurance. If God were to give assurance to this country -- so many millions of people are casting a vote next month -- if God were to give assurance, I mean, if any man were worthy of it! God has given assurance to all men in that He has raised Jesus from the dead. The Man who is to rule -- you are assured that He is the Man and is to succeed in the ruling.

W.W.M. "Submitting yourselves to one another in the fear of Christ", Ephesians 5:21. Does that suggest

a subject state in us -- the state that is right for the kingdom?

J.T. That is the idea, I am sure. It is in the fear of Christ, not the fear of the Lord. It carries with it the idea of grace.

I thought with those few thoughts we might look at chapter 14, where we get the account of the kingdom. "For the kingdom of God is not eating and drinking, but righteousness, and peace, and joy in the Holy Spirit. For he that in this serves the Christ is acceptable to God and approved of men", Romans 14:18, showing that the thing is to permeate; approved of men. What you are doing is not only approved of God but approved of the brethren. You cannot despise the brethren in whatever you are doing. This matter of days is in this chapter, which calls not simply for literal rule, literal regulations. The thing treated calls for a wide open mind in the brethren, and each being persuaded in that mind. There is room for the use of our minds; not simply legal regulations but the use of our minds. It is in the end of the epistle and this matter of persons who are weak in the faith -- you are to receive them, but not to the determining of questions of reasoning. And then one man is assured that he may eat all things but the weak eat herbs. "Let not him that eats make little of him that eats not; and let not him that eats not judge him that eats: for God has received him", Romans 14:3. "Who are thou that judgest the servant of another?" Romans 14:4. The brethren are to be respected and we have to be careful what we say about them, and what we think about them. The word 'master' here is strong: "To his own master he stands or falls", Romans 14:4. Then it goes on, "And he shall be made to stand; for the Lord is able to make him stand. One man esteems day more than day; another esteems every day alike. Let each be fully persuaded in his own mind", Romans 14:5. I was thinking of that; the mind of the Christian

-- what scope there is in it; how the Spirit of God operates in it without any formal regulation. "He that regards the day, regards it to the Lord". The Lord has His place anyway. "And he that eats, eats to the Lord, for he gives God thanks", Romans 14:6. That is to say, the apostle comes back to real Christianity in this instruction. "And he that does not eat, it is to the Lord he does not eat, and gives God thanks. For none of us lives to himself, and none dies to himself". So that the very thought of dying brings in this principle. We do not do it ourselves. We are not selfish in it. We do it to the Lord, so that the Lord in this sense is dominating our every sphere and, therefore, it is said, "For both if we should live, it is to the Lord we live; and if we should die, it is to the Lord we die: both if we should live then, and if we should die, we are the Lord's. For to this end Christ has died and lived again, that he might rule over both dead and living", Romans 14:8,9. There is the extension of the thing; there is the Person. We have been speaking about the principle, but now it is a Person who rules in the realm of death. He rules over them there as He does over the living. "But thou, why judgest thou thy brother? or again, thou, why does thou make little of thy brother? For we shall all be placed before the judgment-seat of God. For it is written, I live, saith the Lord, that to me shall bow every knee, and every tongue shall confess to God", Romans 14:9 - 11. So that now we come to Persons in the rule and the mention of giving Them their places, at the same time making full room in each other for the Lord having His place with each other. If it is a question of the day or meat, then make room for judgment, for a right judgment about it; for there are some things that are not stipulated in the instructions.

A.E.H. I have been thinking over of late that what makes me break down as a good kingdom man

is a lack in my soul as to the apprehension and appreciation of the One that I have to do with, so that the great regulatory principle or Person is God -- the supreme idea of it in verse 12: "So then each of us shall give an account concerning himself to God", Romans 14:12. If we could get an increased apprehension of the majesty and greatness and supremacy of the One that we have to do with, it would all help to make us better kingdom men, would it not?

J.T. Very good; so that whilst we speak of each one having influence according to his measure, yet we are not constituted gods. "There are gods many, and lords many", 1 Corinthians 8:5. We are not gods. There is one God; He is supreme. And then we are told who He is. He is the Father. That is to regulate our minds as to worship, to save us from idolatry. We are to call no man father, but God. "There is one God, the Father, of whom all things, and we for him; and one Lord, Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him", 1 Corinthians 8:6. That is, He is the great operational Person; the great Operator. There is one Lord. Therefore, we are now brought down to the realm of supreme Persons -- God; the Trinity really. We have to learn to respect the Trinity and revere the Trinity and worship the Trinity.

A.R. Cornelius was going to worship Peter. Peter says, I myself also am a man.

J.T. Quite so.

A.B.P. Was Satan's first effort to break the line of rule? "Ye will be as God", Genesis 3:5. Was that a subtle motive of the enemy to break the line of rule?

J.T. Quite so; and to dissipate the idea of the deity of God in the minds of men. That was the devil's aim, and while what he said was right in some sense, as the Lord says, "Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods?" that is, there was authority there, as judges -- they have that place in a certain

limited way, still there is the idea of the deity of God. Whoever used the word first, we cannot say. There are more terms to express the Deity in the Old Testament in the Hebrew, than there is in the Greek. But anyway, we have words enough to show that God is supreme and God is the Judge of all, so that we are preserved and worshipful in regard of Him, and yet at the same time maintaining the thought of obedience and exercising authority in so far as God gives us title to do it, so that the system is maintained. I think chapter 14 is intended to work this out in us, because it is not so much as in chapters 12 and 13 what is told us to do, but what is in the system and how there is room for our minds. Each is to be persuaded in his own mind, so that the apostle says, "Hast thou faith? have it to thyself before God", Romans 14:22. You say, Why should I have it to myself? Faith is to God and the brethren ought to know. But that is what it says here: "Hast thou faith? have it to thyself before God". So that the thing is there and at times not spoken about, but it is there. It is to impress the idea of the system we are in.

C.A.M. I think it is very interesting. So many things come into your mind as you speak. I was thinking about such great men as Daniel and Ezekiel and Jeremiah. They were all contemporary. You could not say that all had to do the same thing, or behaved in the same way. They had a God and they had power before God.

J.T. Quite so. There were twelve apostles. They were all contemporary. They each had commissions and each had to work his commission out. Paul said, I am persuaded. We must make room for that, having persuasions, and that is to be recognised in every one of us, so that there is a certain latitude left open for love to work in.

A.E.H. The great liberality and magnanimity of

a Christian's character comes out in Romans 15:7, "Wherefore receive ye one another". That word really has a very peculiar meaning to it, suggesting being thrown back on the person who does it. It suggests what the system will do in receiving one who does not act just as I say he should act.

J.T. I think from this point on the epistle opens up in affording latitude in the Christian. So the salutations -- whom I salute; that sort of thing. It branches out to make room for the Source. So that it is said to have love in this epistle. I do not know that you find it just that way in any other epistle. The apostle speaks of the love of the Spirit in Romans 15:30: "But I beseech you, brethren, by our Lord Jesus Christ, and by the love of the Spirit", showing what a scope there is for us in this book; how much latitude there is opened up.

C.A.M. That is a very remarkable verse in the last chapter, Romans 16:23: "Gaius, my host and of the whole assembly, salutes you. Erastus, the steward of the city, salutes you, and the brother Quartus". They are all in one verse, but apparently live in a wholly different sphere of things. They all have their individual place.

J.T. It is certainly fine to get into the realm of salutations to the brethren, because then you see who is who; who is worthy of it. All the saints in Rome are not saluted personally.

A.B.P. In a metropolis there would be a sort of polyglot condition, and would this be the basis on which grace would operate, as having learned grace? Being a metropolis such as it was, people of various nationalities would be there, but the environment would be different. Grace would operate in the presence of this. It is not exactly licence, but according to the enlightenment of the conscience; having a good conscience before God.

J.T. In what we are saying it is important to

bring up the matter of conscience, because God has given it a place of late years; what a place it has in relation to the claims of the government.

A.R. Would you explain to us the love of the Spirit? I have often wondered about this verse.

J.T. I thought it was remarkable that it should be found in Romans. We have the fellowship of the Spirit in Corinthians. I have not examined it carefully enough to say any more, but anyway it is found here in Romans 15:30, "But I beseech you, brethren, by our Lord Jesus Christ, and by the love of the Spirit". The idea is that you know that, because if he beseeches you by something, you are to know that something that he uses. For instance, "I beseech you therefore, brethren, by the compassions of God", Romans 12:1. You should know what he means, and if he speaks of the love of the Spirit you should know what he means; something we have realised in our meetings today.

A.P.T. The Colossians seemed to have it. The Colossians seemed to be able to move on this line.

A.R. That is love in the Spirit; this is love of the Spirit.

J.T. It is the personal love of the Spirit that I am speaking of now. Love in the Spirit is another thing.

A.P.T. Do you mean this is the Person Himself?

J.T. Just as if you were to say the Father's love or the Son's love; but the Spirit is out of sight generally, but Paul brings Him in here.

A.T.D. "The Spirit itself makes intercession with groanings which cannot be uttered", Romans 8:26.

J.T. That is in Romans, too.

TEACHING AND ORDER IN ASSEMBLY ADMINISTRATION

John 20:16 - 23; Matthew 18:15 - 20

J.T. These passages teach us of assembly administration, and the first is particularly in mind as to teaching. As we know, the word 'assembly' is not used in the passage, but it is in it; it is contemplated, and the thought is that we might look at the teaching that leads up to the instruction in this chapter, at least in this passage. The word 'Rabboni' is the one Mary uses in replying to the Lord. He says to her, "Mary", in verse 16. It is thought that she represents the receptive element. The gospel really begins with the same thought. The two disciples who followed Jesus said to him, "Rabbi, where abidest thou?" John 1:38. And it is thought that the teaching of the assembly, the instruction as to it is of prime importance at all times, but especially now, and John has this in mind. Not so much to occupy us with official terms but to accustom us to the circumstances of the assembly and the feminine side entering into it; the instruction coming in that connection through a feminine channel. The idea would be among other things that we should be softened in dealing with one another and get adjusted. For she needed adjustment, as did all the disciples at this time, but she represents ardent affection for Christ with certain dark thoughts, unintelligent thoughts, but she became adjusted. John undoubtedly is intended for this, for adjustment. So that she is addressed by her name, of course, which is Mary, but having a meaning somewhat involving suffering, leading to a feeling person. He called her Mary, which is to be noted, undoubtedly meaning that He had intended that her name should be there in this

particular person. "Jesus says to her, Mary. She, turning round, says to him in Hebrew, Rabboni, which means Teacher", John 20:16. The two addresses, that is, the Lord's and hers, are of particular interest at this time.

C.A.M. Would you say that addressing the Lord as Teacher shows she had bowed to His lordship? Would that not be a primary thing?

J.T. I think it would show what was in her mind, for she was not heretofore particularly instructed. She is not characterised particularly as one who had received instruction. She is rather characterised by affection, and as one who had to do with evil. Out of her had been cast seven demons. They had gone out of her. She is taken up more with the Lord personally in the early part of the chapter. She was drawn to the Lord personally in affection but now she has this word that is somewhat unusual. She has this Name to use in responding to Him: Rabboni, and we are told what it means; that she has evidently come on to the light of teaching, of being instructed, which is an important matter especially for sisters, because sisters have a great deal to do with matters of administration. Not in a formal open way, but yet they have a great deal to do with what transpires, and what she had in her mind is very important, therefore, that we should have the teaching entering into these administrative matters.

A.A.T. Had Mary of Bethany received the teaching as she sat at the feet of the Lord?

J.T. That would be the idea with her, evidently at an earlier stage than we are treating here. She had laid hold according to Luke of what marked the moment. The Lord had been announced from heaven on the mount of Transfiguration by the Father as One to be heard. Heaven had announced that He was to be heard. That was the order of the day; as in a later day with Lydia; the Lord opened her

heart to attend to the things spoken by Paul. That is, as it were, another order of the day. Certain things are stressed as needed.

R.W.S. Suppositions may bring damage into the assembly. It says she supposed He was the gardener.

J.T. She was somewhat confused and dark, and it is humbling that there is so much talk in these administrative matters that is found with those who are not receiving adjustment. It is remarkable how many things are said in administrative matters that are not founded on fact. I believe that is the idea here; that that should not be. When she says, Rabboni, she has in her mind that she had been adjusted. Still, she needed more, because the Lord said to her, "Touch me not", John 20:17.

A.N.W. Does she need, too, to be moved from her individualised position somewhat? I understood that Rabboni has the bearing of 'my Teacher', if I understand correctly, and she calls Him "my Lord". She is concerned about "my Lord". I thought it was perhaps a matter of moving from the individual position to His brethren.

J.T. Yes. The 'my' is undoubtedly there according to what we learn. And now it is the time for her to be used, and then that she should go to the brethren. They were in the Lord's mind. She was in the Lord's mind, too, particularly, for the moment, but now they were in His mind, and the message is to come through one who is evidently coming into instruction, freshly, and would surely convey that in what she might have to say to them. It says, "Mary of Magdala comes bringing word to the disciples that she had seen the Lord, and that he had said these things to her", John 20:18. She was not in the position of a teacher and yet she had seen the Lord. That is important, too; and that He had said these things to her, without, perhaps, implying that she quoted verbatim what He said. I would

think she put His words into her own words. It would not be a formal verbatim message. It says, "that he had said these things", not used these words, but said these things.

A.P.T. Does Chloe indicate feminine understanding of the position somewhat in Corinth? "For it has been shewn to me concerning you, my brethren, by those of the house of Chloe, that there are strifes among you", 1 Corinthians 1:11. Does that indicate the feminine idea functioning in that meeting?

J.T. It would be in a similar way, similar condition; the house of Chloe; someone of her house. It would be informal, too, but still evidently carried in a very circumstantial way.

C.A.M. The Lord says "my brethren" in speaking to her. The Holy Spirit records that bringing the word was to the disciples. The disciples would involve we are learners, would it not?

J.T. Well, it would. You mean he does not call them apostles, in keeping with John's line. But the word would intimate that they were learners. They were disciples but they were his brethren.

C.A.M. I was impressed by what you said that He did not distinguish her as a teacher in speaking to her, but what she said would go with His own authority.

J.T. Yes. "That he had said these things", would clearly convey that she thought He was in authority; that He was a Teacher and He was her Teacher. She did not suggest that somebody else had something else. She did not suggest that in her message; that some other person had said something else. It was what He had said.

P.E. Was it weakness on the part of Peter and John that they were not at the tomb to receive this communication? They were at the tomb but they went home and Mary stayed.

J.T. That would show that they had already laid hold of what was there and the facts, but they were content to go home with the facts. They could stay at home and rehearse the facts. In Malachi it says, "Then they that feared Jehovah spoke often one to another; and Jehovah observed it, and heard, and a book of remembrance was written before him for them that feared Jehovah, and that thought upon his name. And they shall be unto me a peculiar treasure, saith Jehovah of hosts, in the day that I prepare", Malachi 3:16,17. Peter and John, I would say, would be content with less than Mary had; with the thought of speaking often, rehearsing the thing together. They laid hold of the facts, I would think, because they had gone in and seen how the linen cloths lay, as if they learned by what they saw in the sepulchre, which is important, too, but certainly not so important as a communication directly from the Lord, which she had. She had looked into the sepulchre, too, but they had gone into it; one of them, and undoubtedly laid hold of the facts, so that they would on the way home, or as they got home, say, we are assured that He is risen. The facts show that. Where the linen cloths are lying and how they are lying would show there was no struggle at all. He could not be taken away in any clandestine way. The linen cloths were left just as they were when they were on His body, which was remarkable. And yet they did not get the communication from the Lord which she did get.

J.T.Jr. Is there some instruction in the fact that the angels say 'Woman'? The Lord says 'Woman' first; and then 'Mary'.

J.T. Well, I would think the feminine idea is stressed, but when He calls her by name, then she is on a higher level really. He calls His own sheep by name, not by such a classification as 'woman'; but still that would mean that the feminine thought is stressed, in such circumstances as that, which, as I

said, I believe, bears on John's way tending to the softening of our feelings.

A.I. Is that not seen in the Lord? According to this verse it says, "Mary of Magdala comes bringing word to the disciples that she had seen the Lord, and that he had said these things to her". Is not seeing the Lord an important matter in relation to bearing testimony?

J.T. It certainly is. That is just the point in it. She is qualified to bear witness; she had seen Him.

C.A.M. Are you looking at Mary as an element among the saints rather than differentiating between brothers and sisters exactly? Would it be right to look at it as an element among the saints that is submissive to the Lord's will and impressionable, and in that way bears spiritual, feminine features?

J.T. Yes; and a clear witness; a competent witness. She had seen the Lord, she regards Him as a Teacher, and that she had been taught by Him, so that she is a competent witness, seeing the Lord qualifies her to be a witness, but then the fact that she is taught is further evidence that she is capable of witnessing the matter in hand, because nothing needs more teaching than having part in the assembly. We are told that angels desire to look into what goes on there, and if we deal with those matters we not only can say we saw the Lord, or she could say she saw the Lord, but she apprehended Him as a Teacher, meaning she had learned something immediately from Him, and that something would bear on the whole matter, because we are coming to assembly facts, and the very highest of them; namely, that they were to be entrusted with something. Whatever they forgave would be forgiven by the Lord. That was most important, because the Lord was entrusting them with something, leaving it with them -- what they should do.

J.T.Jr. It does not say the woman comes, but

Mary of Magdala; that is, the person of that place.

J.T. That enters into witness. She is identified. There were other Marys but there can be no question as to who this Mary was.

J.A.P. The two messengers that Joab sent to David about the death of Absalom showed that the man that was not adjusted did not give right testimony and the man that was right was suited to the message. Does that bear on what you say?

J.T. Just so. Ahimaaz wanted to run. He wanted to do it. He wanted to have part in the thing, and perhaps, more or less in a personal way, but he had to wait for the Cushite. David says, Turn aside and stand here. He just had to wait there. He was really put to shame in that he was not competent. The message was not suited to him, Joab said, but this news is perfectly suited to Mary. She is a suitable person to relate it. She does not relate it with any confusion at all.

A.P.T. In 2 Corinthians 13 it says, "In the mouth of two or three witnesses shall every matter be established", 2 Corinthians 13:1. There is a note there that refers to the word 'matter': it means 'utterance'. I suppose that is what you have in mind: to hear. You are able to hear and report it correctly.

J.T. Yes; because in court witnesses are all examined and all challenged. They are challenged as to whether they are competent, and that is the idea, I think, here. She is competent to bear witness from various facts that are mentioned. She has been taught of the Lord and she has seen Him. She has already been told. She regards herself in that way. Now she has seen Him and has heard Him saying certain things and they were for the brethren. They are of the highest order of importance, because they are "my brethren". First He says to her, "Touch me not", meaning she is to be under restrictions, "I have not yet ascended to my Father; but

go to my brethren and say to them, I ascend to my Father, and your Father, and to my God, and your God". The message is of the highest order, and yet, as we were remarking, she does not intimate that she is giving it verbatim, but in the sense of things, for there is really more in it in that sense; more substance, the word 'things'.

J.S. Would the message, "Go to my brethren" involve His counterpart?

J.T. I do not know that the word 'brethren' goes that far. You are alluding to the assembly as His counterpart. John is not exactly using terms in that way. He is dealing with individuals. It is the brethren as so many persons; so many persons related to Him. You are in the middle of circumstances right through and now you feel you are in the midst of assembly circumstances of a feminine kind; but yet the term 'brethren' lifts them somewhat; 'My Father, and your Father' too. The whole matter is lifted up through these words, and yet she is great enough to carry them and speak of them, not as words but as things. That would mean they are substantial and capable of enlargement, of expansion, because the Father did come into it. "I ascend to my Father, and your Father, and to my God, and your God". Whatever is to be deduced or worked out from what she said is substantial; it is very capable of being enlarged. But the words, the formal words, terms of the most exalted character are there, and they are to be carried into all the subsequent matters, that is, the matter of administration.

R.W.S. Does the official side involve more what is formal and ordered, but this side that you are bringing forward in Mary requires spiritual sensibilities, so that you understand there is more in the matter than appears on the surface?

J.T. That is what I was thinking. Things are

substantial. Words -- if we are to analyse them, we will have to go to the dictionary as to words, what comes out of the mouth. Words are formed in the mouth, the vocal powers; but things -- well, they are of another classification. Things are substantial and capable of enlargement, and there is more elasticity to them. They are less formal. Therefore, anything that comes up, we think of what may be put into this word 'things'.

C.A.M. It must be very great, because the expression 'all things' is used. We can see in a moment it is not the same as 'all words'.

J.T. Quite so.

T.W. The same expression is used in the end of Luke: "And as they were saying these things", Luke 24:36.

J.T. Quite so.

A.N.W. Would you say a word as to why what is done is so effective in bringing the disciples together from their homes to this one meeting place? Why is it so effective, with the exception of one at least?

J.T. Well, there is no doubt it is the same incident that our brother just now has alluded to in Luke. It is the same incident and another train of things comes up. It was a gathering time which would be in keeping with Luke's line of things, that the Lord had gone with them all the way and even submitted to their constraint, confirming what we have been saying as to things. He submitted to their constraint at Emmaus: "Abide with us", Luke 24:29. He submits to that and goes in with them and then vanishes. Of course, a great deal occurs and a great deal that is unwritten occurs, and they would carry all the things in their hearts on the way back to Jerusalem. And when they came there and found the eleven and those that were with them, they were saying certain things: that the Lord was risen and had appeared to Simon, etc.

A.Pf. At the close of John he says, "This is the disciple who bears witness concerning these things, and who has written these things; and we know that his witness is true. 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", John 21:24,25.

J.T. That is good. The word 'things' is stressed. We can see how elastic they are. How much can be enlarged on in them. It is not a retailing of words, the creeds, but the truth of Christianity is set out in things, in persons; things connected with persons.

G.V.D. Would it be right to say that John's presentation is along moral lines? As you said, Mary, and then the disciples, were in a moral state that was suitable. Where they were would suggest what is moral.

J.T. Yes; where they were. It is not even called the upper room. The stress is laid on the importance of these persons. I think that is the way the Spirit of God uses John; the importance of these persons, that the Lord came where they were. For instance, suppose we wanted a meeting-room, referring again to assembly matters, because the procuring of a room or giving up of a room is an assembly matter, and these words would bear on that. Where are the brethren? Because we must be governed by where they are. So that it says, "When therefore it was evening on that day, which was the first day of the week, and the doors shut where the disciples were, through fear of the Jews, Jesus came and stood in the midst", John 21?. That is to say, they are where the disciples were. That must govern any matter, any physical side as to a room.

C.A.M. John's geography seems to depend on where the people are. Bethany was made up by certain persons.

J.T. We have the distance from Jerusalem to

Bethany mentioned, and the distance from Jerusalem to the mount of Olives is mentioned in Acts 1. The disciples were at Bethany. There were particular ones there. And it aids and supports what we are saying about the importance of the disciples. That is, we are now in assembly circumstances, and we are not, of course, speaking of a room, but we are speaking of the disciples. We have passed on from Mary. She has done her service. It is said they were there. As we connect this passage with Luke 24, there would be a sort of gathering principle going on, because Luke says that the Lord Jesus stood in the midst while they were speaking. He does not say they came. He does not say the Lord came. It would seem as if there is no question of His coming or how He came, but He is concerned about the disciples as gathered. John is not saying that. He is not saying anything about gathering, but Luke says they were gathered, and the Lord is concerned from that point of view; where we are gathered. Matthew stresses the word 'gathered' saying, "For where two or three are gathered together unto my name, there am I in the midst of them", Matthew 18:20. Luke borders on that, because while they were saying the things He stood in the midst. But John says, He came and stood, making more of the persons; where the disciples were. The circumstances are now on a high level and what happens is to lead up to this matter of administration, because the idea is introduced in what is recorded. So He says, "Peace be to you". Certain things are said. "And having said this, he shewed to them his hands and his side. The disciples rejoiced therefore, having seen the Lord. Jesus said therefore again to them, Peace be to you:" meaning that what is in hand, what is in the Lord's mind is important, and it is important, too, that they should be in the state to deal with the things, to make them concrete and useful. So that He proceeds

after the reference to peace saying, "As the Father sent me forth, I also send you. And having said this, he breathed into them, and says to them, Receive the Holy Spirit: whose soever sins ye remit, they are remitted to them; whose soever sins ye retain, they are retained". That is the finish. Thomas now comes in, but what is in mind mainly is these remarks which the Lord makes: that He had breathed into them and the other things, all tending to sober them and spiritualise them, make them spiritual and then to be inwardly affected by His breathing. "Receive the Holy Spirit", and then putting it on them to forgive. "Whose soever sins ye remit, they are remitted to them; whose soever sins ye retain, they are retained". Now, the passage in Matthew says, "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", Matthew 18:18. It might be considered casually to be the same thing, but it is not the same thing. It is a question of binding and loosing, but the binding is put before the loosing, whereas this passage places the remission before the retention of sins. "Whose soever sins ye remit, they are remitted to them; whose soever sins ye retain, they are retained".

C.A.M. It must be a very spiritual thing. The Holy Spirit is just mentioned. "Receive the Holy Spirit". The 'the' is really not there. That prefacing this statement would seem to indicate it is a very spiritual matter.

J.T. That is just what I was thinking. Exactly. It is a spiritual matter. We are in assembly circumstances; that is, the persons forming the assembly being in mind, and instead of the Lord waiting for the descent of the Holy Spirit, He breathes into them Himself immediately so as to bring about conditions which the instruction that He had in mind could enter into, and conclude, you might say. It was a

finished matter; the part of assembly administration that refers to forgiveness of sins or retention of sins, and it is left to the brethren to do one or the other.

C.E. Do we see the power connected with Matthew 18 in the loosing and binding?

J.T. Yes; it is more formal and official.

A.N.W. Is it not abnormal for John to deal with administration? Is that fair to say?

J.T. I do not just know why you say that.

A.N.W. Well, I thought that administration stood in relation to church matters. I thought John's was not quite that line.

J.T. Oh, I think he deals with administration, only he deals with it in his own way, and I think this is an illustration of how he deals with things.

R.W.S. It is a great expression of confidence. There is no modification at all in the Lord's statement.

J.T. No. There is no suggestion that they should ask Him about it. It is just that the Lord intends to convey that He has confidence in them, and confidence in them in regard of forgiveness of sins or retention of sins. He raises no question, so to say. Whatever they do He accepts and confirms. "Whose soever sins ye remit, they are remitted to them; whose soever sins ye retain, they are retained". Notice, it is not 'they will be'. There will be no need for anything else. There is no need for any other action. The thing is settled by their decision.

J.H.E. Would Stephen be a good example of this? He said, "Lord, lay not this sin to their charge", Acts 7:60. He was full of the Holy Spirit.

J.T. Well, he was full of the Holy Spirit. Yes. The idea here is these are people that heaven is concerned about. The Lord is concerned about them. He came to where they were, and we are told the day. It was the first day of the week. That is another thing to notice, which is intended to affect assembly matters, and certain things are said as to what He

did. He showed them His hands and His side, and they were glad. They rejoiced. He said, "Peace be to you", twice, and then He speaks about sending them as the Father sent Him. "As the Father sent me forth, I also send you. And having said this, he breathed into them, and says to them, Receive the Holy Spirit: whose soever sins ye remit, they are remitted to them; whose soever sins ye retain, they are retained". There is nothing more, intimating the thing is settled. It is settled by what they do in this matter of forgiveness or retention of sins. 'Remitting' is a well-known word. It is a final sort of word and settles the matter.

W.C.R. When does this remission take place in a formal way? Sins are retained in a general way in an assembly meeting of withdrawal, but in what formal way does this take place -- this remitting?

J.T. Well, other things enter into that, but the general position here is it is a question of what the disciples decide to do; whether they are free to remit matters as soon as they have been committed, or whether they decide to retain the sins that are committed.

D.P. Does this mandate extend beyond the apostle's time? Is it workable in this broken order in which our lot is cast?

J.T. Oh, yes. It is a love question. It is a question of what enters into Christianity, because we cannot go on, we cannot really go on in assembly order and service aside from the dealing with matters, matters of sins. These matters of sins have to be dealt with. It is not here a question of primary forgiveness, as it is called, because it is a question of persons who may have sinned and may be in the assembly themselves. Take the case of Ananias and Sapphira. Their sins were not forgiven; not in the sense of administration; whereas you may have a case where the sins can be forgiven. The Lord is

saying here, It is a question of your decision, and He is, of course, implying that He has left you down here to deal with these matters. You know the facts. At the same time He is trusting you with them, and He will accept your decision. Their decision would be final. There will be no need to bring it up again.

W.C.R. What is the basis for retention of sins?

J.T. That is a question of the state of the person. The disciples are supposed to know. For instance, John says about that in his epistle, "There is a sin to death: I do not say of that that he should make a request", 1 John 5:16. It is a sin unto death. I do not say that you should ask. He does not say it should not be asked for, showing how elastic this thought is among us.

F.S.C. Does not the verse "whose soever sins ye remit, they are remitted" imply we are apt not to remit? We remit and yet there is the danger of not actually doing it. One has felt that the brethren feel the thing afterwards even after it has been forgiven.

J.T. Maybe you would enlarge on your thought.

F.S.C. I was wondering whether some do not feel after they have been restored that they are not fully forgiven. They feel that the extent of what they have done is not fully forgiven them.

J.T. I see what you mean. I have often had to do with that sort of thing, but the Lord is saying here, I am leaving it with you; but you can see it is preceded by so much that they are rendered quite competent to judge right away whether the thing shall be forgiven or not.

A.I. Have you in mind in the thought of remitting and retaining, that the disciples would do things in accord with the mind of the Lord?

J.T. He assumes that they would do what He would do, because they are taught. The idea of teaching enters into the matter before we have these facts stated.

A.A.T. Is it not so that at Corinth they were very slow to bind and very slow to remit?

J.T. The second letter stresses that they should forgive him lest he should be swallowed up with over-much sorrow.

A.N.W. Are you suggesting that if the action is not flagrantly an error it should be received and accepted indisputably?

J.T. I would say that. We have to take account of what the thing may be. The Lord is making it plain that there are certain ones He has confidence in and He is leaving things with them, otherwise there could be nothing done on earth. Everything would have to be referred to heaven, whereas the divine thought is that Christianity is set up here with persons having a final word in settling things. There are such persons that the Lord can trust.

J.A.P. Are there gradations of sin, from what you say about John? He says there is a sin unto death and, therefore, are we to distinguish between sins?

J.T. Oh, well, we are. We read of persons worthy of few stripes and more stripes. And then John says in his epistle, "If any one sin, we have a patron with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous", 1 John 2:1. And "If we confess our sins, he is faithful and righteous to forgive us our sins, and cleanse us from all unrighteousness", 1 John 1:9. All these things enter into what we are saying.

A.N.W. Has it to be borne in mind that if it is necessary to retain sins, there is the possibility and probability that the sin may be remitted? There is the remission as well.

J.T. There is. The Lord surely is making much of remission because He mentions it first; and especially in the freshness of the Spirit's vigour in early days, one would think there would be a readiness to

confess sins and correspondingly a readiness to remit them.

A.T.D. The exalted nature of the teaching would have a bearing on the way things are administered.

J.T. Just so. The Lord is contemplating here the best possible instruction. These disciples have had the very best instruction and now He is adding to that. Mary is saying she has been instructed and that the Lord was her Instructor, and so is He the Instructor of all the disciples. Therefore, there ought to be a readiness to conform with what He would wish; therefore, he is thinking, clearly, of a hard situation that is difficult to overcome, but the freshness of the work of God in early days would suggest that there would be a readiness to judge sins, to confess them, and on the other hand a readiness on the part of the disciples to forgive them.

J.T.Jr. There is a remarkable reference in 2 Chronicles 15 in regard to conditions in Israel. "Now for a long while Israel was without the true God, and without a teaching priest, and without law", 2 Chronicles 15:3. Are not those three things connected with administration: the true God, the teaching priest and the law?

J.T. That is very important; whereas we have the teaching priest here with the Lord and we have one who recognises Him; that is, Mary. And now the disciples have a message through her which ought to help them further as to this matter of forgiveness, and, I believe, that is what is in mind: the conditions of forgiveness among the brethren. Are we ready to forgive?

A.B.P. Would you say that in the case of Ananias and Sapphira Peter seems to make a difference? He spoke to Ananias and when he concluded what he said, Ananias fell down and expired, but when Sapphira came in he asked her a question. If she had been honest and opened up to the matter, the

outcome may have been different. There seems to be the implication that Peter made a difference. Would that be right?

J.T. I would think that. She is given an opportunity to adjust herself, I would say, but conditions for forgiveness were not there. These two persons were in collusion. If they are not in collusion we must make allowance for that, but if there is collusion then it is more serious. But the Lord is contemplating here that there is a state, there is a readiness to forgive if forgiveness is warranted; if there is anything to warrant it.

R.W.S. The freshness that you allude to of the Holy Spirit would promote spiritual feeling instead of personal feelings, would it not? I was impressed with what you said about the freshness of the Holy Spirit. The very first words the Lord uses after breathing into them the Holy Spirit is in regard to remitting.

J.T. It looks as if that is the setting. The Spirit is just freshly given, not in any official way because the official was at Pentecost. The unofficial ways are usually softer and more immediate and there is more spiritual sentiment involved in them. You would think twice, you would hesitate before you would confirm that the thing was right.

A.P.T. You mentioned the first day of the week. Would that help in this matter? There is a danger of overlooking that the assembly really has its start there.

J.T. I think that is good to bring that up. It is the second time the first day of the week is used in this chapter, which is important. It is used in 1 Corinthians 16 also in regard of sentiment; that is, the collection; the collection on the first day of the week; as the Lord has prospered him, so let him put by on the first day of the week in view of the collection, that there may be no collections when I

come. The apostle, I think, means he does not wish apostolic authority to enter into this matter of a collection, and so in regard of forgiveness of sins. You are disposed to be liberal, as it were, for James says, "He that brings back a sinner from the error of his way shall save a soul from death and shall cover a multitude of sins", James 5:20. That is a liberal thought. There is such a thing as that, to be liberal in dealing with a soul if he has sinned. And again in Galatians it says, "Ye who are spiritual restore such a one in a spirit of meekness", Galatians 6:1. It is an important matter to get the persons right that do it.

A.P.T. Eutychus seems to have been helped on this line. He was in a pretty bad way apparently.

J.T. He was. He was looking out the window when he should have been listening to Paul. He did not do what the brethren were doing. And many young people are not listening to what has been said, and things are not too good with them. But still the government of God overtook Eutychus and Paul was ready to go down three stories to enfold him in his arms, and he says, His life is in him, Acts 20:10. He is not dead, as if there would be recovery. And then they went up after the recovery and had a conversation and broke bread, too, and they brought the boy away, not a little comforted. That is what I would say is Christianity.

A.N.W. Whereas as regards Matthew is it not observable that the binding precedes the loosing immediately following the case of the man who does not listen to the assembly?

J.T. He is manifestly a hard man; a brother whom he has trespassed against speaks to him about it, and two or three besides speak to him about it, and they tell it to the assembly and he does not listen to the assembly. That is a hard case. That is for binding. "Let him be to thee as one of the

nations and a tax-gatherer". Some are bringing up a lot about this matter, about the time of shaking hands. There is nothing like that in Scripture; "let him be to thee as one of the nations and a tax-gatherer". That is to the person who is sinned against. Others may have to do with him, but as far as you are concerned, his case is settled.

A.T.D. What does that mean: "as one of the nations and a tax-gatherer"?

J.T. It is just a figure to show that he is not fit for fellowship at least as far as you are concerned, because that passage does not imply consummation of the matter. The consummation is what he is to you, and it is not because he has trespassed against you, but it is because he does not listen to the assembly, bringing out what the assembly is; that the Lord is saying to us, I am thinking of the assembly. "I speak as to Christ and as to the assembly", and we should be speaking of it and thinking of it, and if any matter comes up, let us see we do not ill-treat the assembly, treat it with contempt in any way.

A.T.D. The individual trespassed against would merge with the assembly if further action had to be taken.

J.T. It looks to me as if the Lord is thinking of the man who is sinned against. He is to be taught what to do. He knows what to do, and he should know what to do, but then if there is any contempt of the assembly, any disregard of it, the Lord does not like that. It is a greater matter to him than the forgiveness of the sinner. He has set the assembly here for Himself, to represent Himself, and if there is a case where the assembly can act and has ground for acting, they should act; and if they do not, they fail in the function belonging to the assembly.

J.A.P. Would you say that a man like Ahab who characteristically was wicked, heeded what Elijah said, because it says he humbled himself?

J.T. "Seest thou", says Jehovah. And he was a very wicked man really. But Jehovah says, "Seest thou how Ahab humbleth himself before me?" 1 Kings 21:29. That is important. Make the most of it. There is much he should have done, but what he did has to be recognised.

S.M. I was thinking of that. It says he walked softly.

J.T. Just so. He walked softly before Jehovah. I think it brings out what heaven is in these matters. How liberal God is, and is ready to make allowance for everything. That is every good thing as Paul says to Philemon: "every good thing which is in us", Philemon 1:6.

A.A.T. Is it not so that every case has to be handled with wisdom? I was thinking of Solomon. Immediately after David's death there were certain cases that had to be adjusted before the thing came to a climax in the temple. Shimei had special grace extended to him.

J.T. He had. And the point there as to Shimei was that he was guilty really of great contempt, but David put it on his son Solomon to see to him, which he did. But, at the same time, when David was returning it was a favourable time, and that is the point of the Lord here. It is a favourable time. It is an assembly time but it is a favourable time. It is a time for the manifestation of favour, of kindness and goodness toward all. So one of David's men says, "Should not Shimei be put to death for this, because he cursed Jehovah's anointed?" 2 Samuel 19:21. True enough. But David says, "Do not I know that I am this day king over Israel?" That is the point. We have to recognise the function of the assembly and see to it that it has full scope. David says, I have full scope to act as king and I am acting as king and forgiving Shimei for the moment. Well, that is important.

So that we assert the Lord's authority in its direct application or working in the assembly.

T.E.H. I was thinking of Hosea in chapter 14, he outlines that the people had sinned and he says, "Take with you words", Hosea 14:2. He outlined what they should say as if it was a favourable time to come back in.

F.S.C. Would this scripture imply that the Lord is present, whereas the one in John would imply He is absent?

J.T. Matthew really is more formal. Quite so; more official. The Lord is going to be absent; but Matthew is treating of the Lord being present. Quite so.

A.B.P. Does the procedure in Matthew 18 include what we speak of as an assembly meeting? I have in mind verse 17.

J.T. I think so. The order is this matter of binding and loosing. I am just going to read it; the question of the binding on the earth and the loosing on the earth. Well now, that runs down to the end of verse 18. You are speaking of verse 17?

A.B.P. Yes. My inquiry is, does the procedure which is given through verse 17 include what we speak of as an assembly meeting?

J.T. I was just going to seek to get the order in which the whole matter is set. Verse 17 reads, "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. Verily I say to you, 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". That is a finished part of the instruction. It is a subdivision, as it were; finished. Then he says in verse 19, "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. For where two or three are gathered together unto my name there am I in the midst of them". "Again I say to you", would mean, I would apprehend, that we have come down to another stage in the assembly's history I was only thinking that before the thing could be really answered we have to get this whole paragraph. That is, the 'again' in verse 19 contemplates another stage in assembly history, and that stage implies that we are not exactly in the pristine conditions of the assembly when there were many, but only a few If we are now dealing with a matter of this kind, it is brought down to two or three; "two of you", which is also to be noted, and then "two or three". That would, I understand, bring the matter down to our conditions where there is a scattering and a smallness and a divided condition, but yet there is the idea of "two of you"; and then the two or three gathered not simply two or three persons, but "two or three ... gathered together unto my name". The thing therefore, becomes varied with these conditions. There are two of the assembly; the Father hears them; and then there are two or three of the same gathered together unto the Lord's Name. The first relates to the Father and the second relates to the Lord. Therefore we can deal with matters of this kind and finalise them, too, on this principle.

A.B.P. But, if in taking matters up we look for a scripture that would guide us in the procedure in carrying through, do we consider this scripture through verse 17 of Matthew 18 as the complete procedure, or do we have to go to Acts 15 for a fuller outline of how things are done?

J.T. The passage up to verse 17 might be applied now. That is to say, up to the word 'again'. The truth is always the truth, and I think we would rightly proceed according to the early part of the passage in dealing with the trespass, for instance.

And then the question comes up as to whether we are really proved to be of the assembly in what we are doing, and whether we are gathered unto Him, unto the Lord. These are additional thoughts that must be clarified.

C.A.M. I think that is very helpful. There are two sections and they correspond with the light of Timothy and 2 Corinthians, put together. Would you agree with that?

J.T. I would indeed. Therefore, twenty-five years ago when the matter came up about withdrawing or putting away, it was remarked that someone said, Well, which shall we use? Shall we have 2 Timothy or Matthew 18 or 1 Corinthians 5? Which applies today? Well, the reply was really at the time, Both apply. Both are Scripture and both have an application in the souls of the persons who are dealing with them; but in outward conditions and forms you want to be in accord with the time of humiliation within; the smallness of the times and the disjointed or dislocated conditions, so that you feel it is better to say, We withdraw. It is happier and more consistent than assuming to be acting as they did at the beginning.

A.A.T. In 2 Timothy 2:19, is that not assembly iniquity?

J.T. I would think so. You would not like to say absolutely that it was not any other, but I would think it is religious iniquity, ecclesiastical iniquity.

A.A.T. Why do we use that scripture when a brother is on a wrong course and has nothing to do with anything religious?

J.T. We cannot strictly say it does not refer to any other iniquity, because the word 'iniquity' is unqualified. "Let every one who names the name of the Lord withdraw from iniquity", 2 Timothy 2:19. It is just the meaning of the word, whatever iniquity it is. We would be led to think, but not to insist on

it or assume that it is just so, but I would think ecclesiastical iniquity is in mind. The apostle is instructing Timothy as to that point. There was a great deal of it coming in at that particular time.

W.W.M. Do you think in Matthew 18 that the Lord is stressing to everyone the confidence and authority that He has placed in the assembly?

J.T. That is the thing. The Lord is always jealous that the assembly should have its place. Just as David says, "Do not I know that I am this day king over Israel". This brother that was questioning him -- he was not thinking of that. David had been deposed from the throne but was now back on it. The Lord has a place in the assembly and that is the thing to keep before us: the authority that belongs to the assembly.

J.A.P. Do you mean that David's counsellors were trying to make the assembly a vehicle for their personal feelings?

J.T. Just so. That was just it.

THINGS THAT ARE DOUBLED

Genesis 41:32; Genesis 41:50 - 52

I have read just these brief passages on account of the references to double; double occurrences and double fruitfulness. I have selected Joseph to bring out the significance of the references to these words. They suggest or foreshadow or mark the history of Joseph. Other references in his history of a similar kind being available; and they point, as the sequel shows, to a man of affairs, a man of great things; things that could be doubled and, for that matter, tripled. We all know how the crops brought forth bountifully in handfuls in his day, so that he became great; prophetically announced, but he became great actually, and he marked the import of times in the history of the world; for, indeed, he was a world man; not a man of the world; far otherwise, but a man who had to do with the world and affected it very much for good. Indeed his name, the name he acquired, or rather which was conferred upon him implied according to the facts we have, "Saviour or sustainer of the life of the world", Genesis 41:45. So that we have much scope for our subject involved in the word 'double'. I should insert here that as the world moved on after the deluge many things happened; it was a time of many things happening without any definiteness to them, although a few men regarded it in that light; a few, and outwardly unimportant, but really very important. They inaugurated certain things that were to be guides afterwards, and Joseph was among those men that had part in the history of the world in that sense. It was a provisional time in the history of the world, meaning that it was not ordered politically very particularly. Politics began to take form in it, but things were very irregular and

intended to be. Withal, those few that were especially noted, some of them called prophets, made impressions in the course of things, and these impressions were to grow and to last. Hence, all others, as it were, were lost in the general position. How many myriads there were, who can tell, but still certain things were being built up that were to continue and others were to come in and take part in them, and as I said, among these was Joseph coming out in Genesis as a youth; but marked off already, even then. Even in his infancy he began to make impressions just as John the baptist did before he was an infant, before he was born. That is how God works and, at the same time, He is not committing Himself to anything formally, but things are happening that He is taking note of and giving them place. They are to shine in the coming world.

And so, Joseph, as I said, is one of these and he comes into prominence in Egypt. His life really was spent, we may say, in Egypt. From the time he was a young man his life was spent in Egypt. He died when he was one hundred and ten years of age. He was a family man. God was working on those lines, taking note of family men, and Joseph came into note here. He came into note in the prison. Such was he, that adverse circumstances could not drown nor overwhelm nor cause him in any way to be out of the mind of God or out of the mind of the people of God, however few they were. He had buoyancy and spiritual persistency, so that his mark was made according to God. He nourished all the time. God made him to prosper throughout, we might say; even when he seemed to be in the most adverse circumstances he prospered. I need not reflect on that, that we are living in such times, and yet those who are of God are prospering. This chapter is a marked chapter from Joseph. Something occurs, not in ordinary people or an ordinary person, but

in the leading monarch, the leading man of the day. I think God is helping us to keep an eye on things and persons whom God is affecting even although they may not know Him, like Cyrus, because His people are to come before great men. That is His thought; not mean men but great men; great men in man's idea even.

And so, certain things happened; a certain thing indeed happened, and it brings out this word 'double' that I am speaking of. It was a remarkable occurrence. There were really two occurrences in the dream. It was a dream. There were no threats in regard to the non-revelation of it such as there were in later days in Daniel's time. Pharaoh was monarch and he takes a hint from an ordinary man in his house; the butler of his house. He says to him one day when this matter of Joseph came up, "I remember mine offences this day", Genesis 41:9. He should have been reminded of Joseph every day really, for Joseph gave him a sign, an indication how he could recall or remind himself of Joseph, but he did not. He forgot him. But still this notable day in Pharaoh's history came and the butler was reminded of his faults. It is very wholesome when we are reminded of our faults if we have not been accustomed to remind ourselves of them and judge them before God and before the brethren, too. But he was reminded of his faults this very day, and he is ready to tell Pharaoh about Joseph. He was the man Pharaoh needed. Pharaoh sent for Joseph, so that the matter was brought out. What was it? It was a double matter, like the Lord's supper; a double matter, like many other things. There were two dreams really. He had an awaking in the middle of them which made them two; not two dreams at once, but one dream at a time; and Joseph explained to Pharaoh that the dream was one.

So that we are reminded of the importance of

reduction in these matters, especially in ministry. Instead of dividing up sometimes we have to contract, reduce, to get the point. And so Joseph tells Pharaoh that inasmuch as he had a double repetition of the dream, the meaning is that it is certain. That is to say, the interpretation is in the thing that happens. Pharaoh knew there was a repetition of it, a double repetition of it; he did know that, but he did not know the meaning of that. And that is what I am here tonight for, dear brethren, to seek to give some little understanding of things, and there are many things happening. Some of them are more than double, more than triple, but having only one significance, as if God would teach us to reduce and learn the thing well; not to spread out too much. So Joseph says, In that there was a double repetition of it, the meaning is that it is certain. "And as regards the double repetition of the dream to Pharaoh, it is that the thing is established by God, and God will hasten to do it", Genesis 41:32. Great things are happening, as I need not say, and occasioning great interest and inquiry, but God can reduce them; make them one. The fact is directed or pointed at the brethren. We may be sure of that, however few we are, that they are the ones, and that these great matters -- however many they seem to be -- the dream is one. God is saying, I am thinking of you. There is, of course, ministry, but nevertheless, the dream that Pharaoh had, not what Joseph had, was one; and God had in His mind that it was one; just one, one idea. It is for us, dear brethren, to inquire, because the explanation of what seems widespread and far beyond human control even is really very small in God's mind. It is one matter. But then he says there was a double repetition and that was for you. That was what Pharaoh had to know, meaning that the thing was certain; that God was dealing in certainties, not in fancies nor imaginations.

God is dealing in certainties and these certainties all point to the Christian, to the believer, His own which are in the world. The world is dragging along in its own way, but something is going on in relation to some and it is just one matter; and that matter is to be determined by the facts and the occurrences, that is to say, of the dream. There were two dreams, as I said, but they were one. The dream was one. So it is that we shall find out -- there can be no doubt about that -- we shall find out that the dream is one; that God is going on with one thing and all is converging on that. Nothing can happen save as it affects that.

And so he says to Pharaoh, the double repetition means that the dream is one and that it is going to happen. It refers to seven fat and flourishing years and seven lean ones. It is a world matter. It is a world history, for God is not dealing with small things. He is dealing on a wide platform, and His people are on it or operating in it, and they are being affected. Whatever else may happen, they are being affected. They will stand when others have gone. So the dream was one and, as I said, Joseph's history is full of this thought, of double; because he is going to be in charge of the fruitfulness. The name of his second boy Ephraim was "double fruitfulness" and things are not left loosely with God. Administration is a great feature with God and He is going to have His administrators or administrator, and that administrator is going to have plenty on hand. So that we are to awake and see what is going on and see to it that we are not short; that the brethren are not short; at least, they should not be. God intends us to be doubly fruitful. You might say, I do not see much sign. That may be. I would readily admit that, but not altogether, because if there be not double in numbers, increase in numbers, there is increase in quality, and that is more important. And

I would urge every one, young people anyway, to see to quality. Those who are content with being in the right position outwardly are very apt to leave it or be taken out of it, snatched out of it. We want to be well off. God has the world under Him and He is using it. It is available to His people. Be where they may, God is seeing to it that they are not short. We should not be. This word 'double' is going to go down this line, the line of Joseph.

And so, when Jacob would send some of his sons the second time to Egypt, he says, Take a present to the man; a little so-and-so, a little so-and-so, but the very best. This was the lord of all Egypt and these were poor shepherds ostensibly, but they were to take a present to him. He says, you took some down before; take double money with you this time. They might have said of their father Jacob, He is ready to perish. That is what one said about him later on: a perishing Aramaean was our father and he came into Egypt with a few, Deuteronomy 26:5. Well, they prospered enormously. The land was full of them. The devil did his best to minimise them, to reduce them, to drown them in the river -- the males. But no. And so it was that Jacob said, Take double money. They say, Well, we have not got much. But have you not? God has much. When Israel left Egypt they came out with great property. You say, Did they have any before? They did. Jacob said he had his wages changed ten times, but still he had something. Here he says to his sons, Take double money with you. I am not now suggesting that we should make much of our salaries, because there are big salaries going about and they are very tempting, but they do not make much of our spirituality. They will reduce our spirituality. But Jacob had passed that time. Joseph had been born in the meantime and the name of Joseph meant that God shall add; not diminish but add. And now Joseph is here.

But the meaning of Joseph's name did not refer to addition to him. It referred to Jacob. When he gave names to his own sons the effect referred to him, referred to Joseph. Double fruitfulness referred to Joseph, but, as I said, Joseph had come in and things were doubled in Jacob's history; not in Joseph's history. The point was Jacob would have things doubled to him and he did.

And so, dear brethren, as I said before, we get principles in these men beginning with Abraham particularly, even going back to such as Melchisedec, a mystic sort of man. The world does not give us much help as to what he means or who he was, but the Spirit of God does. And there was Noah. What a man he was! A man not of great property, but a man of great ability to do things. What your hand finds to do, do it with your might. That is Noah. But these men, as I said, made impressions, and above all Joseph -- this doubling-up of things. What a man of means he was; he was a man of affairs, he came in early, he came in one day; he came in at noon, meaning that he had great affairs; he had very little time, but he came in at noon. He wished to be with his brethren. The matter was a matter of the brethren. He saw Benjamin and his bowels were moved for him. He was a man of affection. That is the idea. That is the kind of thing that is going on in the world. These men are not many in themselves, but they have quality and they have affections. They are ready to waste even, if it be apparent that they are wasting, to let love have some scope. If a man should give all that he has it would be nothing. Love is everything. Without love I am nothing. These men that are going about now, strutting about this earth -- I am not wishing to speak disparagingly of them -- what does it mean? Seven thousand names of men were overthrown in one city. Seven thousand names;

that is, great people. They are destroyed in the destruction of the city. How many cities are being destroyed now. It is a very humbling thing to have to say, and a sorrowful thing, too, for our fellow-beings. But there it is. It is a remarkable thing, the destruction of cities and yet it is an era of cities, great cities, big cities, many of them, and now the destruction of them. And still they are there. They are there whom God has His eye on, and they have love. And may I say, double love? Is there any such thing amongst us as twice as much as we used to have? Well, there is the means of it, because in the book of Romans the love of God is shed abroad in our hearts by the Holy Spirit which is given to us. What a basis for love! If a man were to give all that he has for love, it would be utterly contemned. It is not acquired that way. Love is acquired by the Spirit. It is a scarce commodity outwardly, but still it is there and growing, more and more -- that is the thing -- double, anyway, like Job's cattle. He did not have a double number of sons and daughters, but he had a double number of cattle, sheep and the like. And so, I should like to be great as one who had something doubled; something that is of God that is doubled. There is room for it, you may be sure, and if we get the doubling of love we shall get the doubling of the size of the meeting. It is a question of the love, you may be sure. "By this shall all know that ye are disciples of mine, if ye have love amongst yourselves", John 13:35. That is how it is to be now. Love one for another. No party love. Partisanship is abominable to heaven, to God, and to Christ, and to the Spirit and to all true brethren; baneful. It is love amongst ourselves. Let it be doubled and tripled. There is a means of doing it. The basic thought is there in abundance, but it is the Spirit Himself that is the basis of it, but it is worked out in human hearts. You hardly ever get the love

of the Spirit mentioned. It is mentioned, and, of course, I am not saying that He is not God. He is. The Spirit of God is God, but He keeps Himself out of sight and He is telling us that He is making love; that His position is to promote love, and that promotion is in our own hearts, the hearts of Christians. He takes His abode up in our hearts, and it is to cause the love to grow, and that kind of love. Love amongst ourselves. And so, to show you how this matter of doubling happens, Ezekiel had to do with it. It was brought to his attention in a remarkable way. He describes to us in Ezekiel 47 a river that flowed out from the house of God. It flowed eastward and it became a great river; a river that could not be passed over. It began very small, but it grew and it could not be passed over. He could not pass over it or swim over it. It cannot be passed over. That was a matter of light that he got; what you might call objective light about that river. How much he could have said about it! If he were asked to give an address about it, he could have done it well. But he had traversed the river from the ankles up, and he tells us it was a river that could not be passed over. Well, it doubled, and so he went on. He does not say much of what he saw, but he sees much apparently, as if it were a thing to be apprehended abstractly without the concrete thing. A river we will call it; a river that cannot be passed over. Plenty of water in it, but it seems to be more abstract in his mind, though he says, rivers to swim in. But he turned around. He was on this side. He turned around, and that is important. The brethren are running along on one line and doing well, making a little, but on the old line; on the line of old things, making money. There is nothing new in that at all. Jacob knew that, but he got turned around and saw things differently. I have often spoken about this before, but he looks this way; he turns around and

looks this way and there is a double river, another one, much greater than he thought it was. That is important. What a man Ezekiel was! What experience he had now and he tells us about the fruits that were there, and what the river was going to do, going to spread abroad. It is going to go east, he said; not going to the west. It is not like the Mississippi. It is going to the east. It is going to the Dead Sea. It is going to heal the waters. That is the kind of thing. It is a double one. So that you can see how we are getting larger inwardly on those lines; so as to many other things that I could speak of. We see an elder. Well, you say, what does that mean? I thought there were no elders now. But there are. Thank God there are. I see several of them here. And what are they doing? Where are they living? Well, I could tell about them too, where they live. Maybe the gathering is not growing where they live; maybe it is saturated. I am not accusing; I am mentioning facts. We do not want to reach saturation in anything. If the meeting is too large and unusable, divide it and make another. I am saying that by the way, for Paul speaks of elders that rule well. You say, Rule? We are living in a democratic country. Yes. But rule is the order. In spite of the democratic principles, rule is prevailing in this country. Thank God for that. I always thank God for that. It is prevailing now, too. God is not allowing a man to be taken out of His hands for that purpose. He has seen to it that the man He wants is going to stay, however long or short a time. God will have His way. But I am speaking now of an elder. Does he rule well? Paul says, If he does he is worthy of double honour.

So it is for us, dear brethren, if we want good meetings, healthy meetings, ordered meetings, meetings that can be doubled, let us have rule. Let us have this rule and if those who do it are doing it, let them have double honour. Do not be stinted in

the honour you pay to the brethren who are serving you well. Of course, not that they are saying that, but there is such a thing as getting degrees. Stephen got a degree. He purchased to himself a good degree. Men purchase honours by money, you know, get titles in certain countries, but that is not how it is to be reached at all. Stephen did not reach it that way. He purchased to himself a good degree as if there was not another -- as an individual man. There is not much made of Stephen as to what he did for the brethren; as to his gift, not much. But he represents individual Christianity in a certain sense, which is important. Christianity is never to be understood save in relation to its collective character, but still individual Christianity is a right thing, too. So Paul says, for instance, If you have faith, have it to yourself, Romans 14:22. Now tell me what that means. You say, Well, I would be glad to tell the brethren I have faith, make it known to the brethren. But Paul says, If you have faith, have it to yourself. That is to be understood, that I can get on in a secret way to a certain point on my own account with God. Are there not Enochs today? Is the idea of Enoch given up? Not at all. A great servant of God that is often talked of amongst us, said, Rule will improve the world by one man. You say, Well, I want to get on with the brethren. Of course you do. So do I. But I want to do things for God. If there is nobody else to do it, I want to do what I can for God. So Stephen was like that. He purchased to himself. You say, Why does it not say with others? Scripture does not say that. He purchased to himself a good degree and much boldness in the faith.

Well, am I throwing things out in handfuls as if they did not exist? But they do exist. And it is for each of us to understand the Scripture, make use of it and grow in it and help others. And so it was with Stephen, as I said, he purchased to himself a

good degree and much boldness in the faith. So if there is an elder let him rule well. The idea of elders is usually that there are two or more. The appointments for eldership in Paul's day were in twos or more; appointing elders in every city; not an elder, but elders. But still, if one of them rules well, let him be worthy of double honour. So that we have something to notice -- what God is doing in the midst of this irregular, disordered, as we might say, troubled world. God is moving on quietly, systematically, I might say, too, with definiteness. He is reaching an end, and He is seeking to call us into it, every one of us; into what He is doing. "In quietness and confidence shall be your strength", Isaiah 30:15. And so, if a man is ruling well, just one brother -- there may be several elders in the gathering, but he is ruling well, let him be worthy of double honour. I will not go on any further. I am somewhat irregular in what I am saying, but it is important. I hope all will take it to heart, that you will get into line with what Joseph inaugurated in this way. How well off he was! How he led in helping others. How he saved the world. He became the very sustainer of the world by the corn that grew through his means under God. May God bless the word!

THE WORD OF GOD AND THE PRIESTHOOD OF CHRIST

Hebrews 4:1 - 16

J.T. The apostle and high priest of our profession having been touched in this section open up the way for the word of God and the priesthood of Christ. They go together. So that the subject for this reading would be the word of God and the priesthood of Christ; the word of God calling for hearkening, and the priesthood intended to help us in hearkening and in obedience. The two chapters so far, that is chapters 3 and 4, are one in this sense; it is the same subject only that Hebrews 3 is more severe as to hearkening and its consequences. Hebrews 4 is less severe and points out that we may be near to the accomplishment of an end and yet miss it. So that it is, "Let us therefore fear, lest, a promise being left of entering into his rest, any one of you might seem to have failed of it". So that what is alluded to is more negative in chapter 4, for God would Himself feel that we should miss what is so infinitely important, namely the matter of entering into the divine rest; yet we may come short of it because of not hearkening to the word, not mixing it with faith. It is said, "Let us therefore fear, lest, a promise being left of entering into his rest, any one of you might seem to have failed of it. For indeed we have had glad tidings presented to us, even as they also; but the word of the report did not profit them, not being mixed with faith in those who heard". Not being mixed with faith; so that the mind may become active in taking in the mind of God but void of faith, it fails.

A.B.P. Do you connect the ministry of the word with the apostleship of Christ?

J.T. That is what I thought, and the high priesthood is the support of those who are spoken to, so that they may not come short.

A.T.D. Is this rest a present thing?

J.T. It is, only what is stressed is that it remains. That is, it is open. It is still an open matter. The door is not closed. "There remains then a sabbatism to the people of God". And it is said that we who have believed do enter into it. There are some who do, and the question is how many and whether any might fail of it, so that, "If they shall enter into my rest", Hebrews 4:3. That is a question which implies a negative, "although the works had been completed from the foundation of the world. For he has said somewhere of the seventh day thus, And God rested on the seventh day from all his works: and in this again, If they shall enter into my rest. Seeing therefore it remains that some enter into it". The matter is dealt with very cautiously and skilfully, and yet firmly as to the possibility of missing a great opportunity in failing to hearken to the word, in failing in faith.

A.A.T. "The word of the report", Hebrews 4:2 -- is that the report that the spies brought down?

J.T. That is right. It is the report that they brought down, because it was a true one. All of them fell in with that, with the report that the spies brought down. They are all in it, and now the fault is that some fail in not hearkening to the report.

A.I. Would this report that you are now speaking of connect with present ministry?

J.T. Yes; it is a question of what is ministered; what God is saying; we get help in referring to the historical reference in Numbers 13. The twelve spies had been sent up by Moses and they brought down a true report, but presently someone came in and added something that seemed to deny or set aside the general report.

A.A.T. Is it not remarkable that that report came through ministry, through the spies, and not right through Moses?

J.T. They were really witnesses of the land. They were witnesses of what they reported. It was not a matter of mere hearing, something they heard. They saw; they brought down the grapes.

A.R. How do you link that thought up with the authority of Moses, or the authority of Christ as today?

J.T. The primary commission, for it was a commission of twelve men, was sent out by Moses and authority was attached to it. "Let us therefore fear, lest, a promise being left of entering into his rest, any one of you might seem to have failed of it. For indeed we have had glad tidings presented to us, even as they also; but the word of the report did not profit them, not being mixed with faith in those who heard". It was mixed with faith in some but not generally.

Ques. Would refusing the report mean they refused Moses?

J.T. It really amounted to the authority of God, because that is what is in mind: the apostle and high priest of our profession who is Christ, and chapter 3 shows that the Speaker is God.

A.P.T. Does that mean it is not only what is said but who says it?

J.T. Just so. That is the point in this whole epistle. "God having spoken in many parts and in many ways formerly to the fathers in the prophets, at the end of these days has spoken to us in the person of the Son", Hebrews 1:1, or merely "in Son". That is God Himself speaking only in the character of Son, and that is what this chapter takes up.

A.N.W. It is not exactly the report, but the word of the report -- what God would convey in that report.

J.T. Just so, "the word of the report".

J.A.P. Is it interesting that there were two versions, but the Spirit of God calls the one that Caleb and Joshua gave "the report"? Would you say something about that?

J.T. That is a good point, too. The report is, it says, well-accredited, accredited by witnesses who saw the things that they reported. Therefore, the whole matter turns on the authority behind Christianity, for Christianity is in mind, but Christianity over against Judaism. Through Judaism was the attack. The word came through the report, but there were those who denied it, or if they did not deny it they did not mix it with faith.

T.E.H. Would the writer of the epistle to the Hebrews be a prince in that sense? Every one of the twelve that went up was a prince. I was wondering if the writer of the Hebrews would be like a prince in character.

J.T. Just so. The characteristic one would be Joshua whose name was changed to a name that indicated 'Jehovah, the Saviour'. That is, it is really our Saviour we are dealing with; the One who is speaking is our Saviour.

F.S.C. Would God taking hold of the seed of Abraham link the spiritual and the natural together?

J.T. Yes; it is to bring out the humanity of the Lord, and that His deity is not altered by it. The addition of His humanity does not alter His deity, because the beginning of chapter 3 says, "For he has been counted worthy of greater glory than Moses, by how much he that has built it has more honour than the house. For every house is built by someone; but he who has built all things is God. And Moses indeed was faithful in all his house, as a ministering servant, for a testimony of the things to be spoken after; but Christ, as Son over his house, whose house are we, if indeed we hold fast", Hebrews 3:3 - 6. So that the point is that the Speaker is God and the Builder is

God. All that is to bring out what the Israelites were doing in refusing to hearken to the word, in failing to hearken. They were failing to enter into the rest of God, for that is what was involved. The rest was to be entered into, not on the ground of promise only but of hearkening to the word.

A.B.P. If authoritative ministry is given as bearing on a matter and there is uncertainty in relation to it after the ministry is given, is it a safe course to follow to obey the truth?

J.T. I would think that. It is a question of who the speaker is, and there can be no question, therefore, of what he says. What they are up against is what has been said and who says it, not simply the spies but the apostle here. The beginning of the section is on the apostleship of Christ, and therefore it is that the One who says it is pointed out as having built all things, and of course God did that. God did that and, therefore, God is the Speaker, hence, the serious responsibility of not hearkening. It is not simply refusing it but not hearkening.

A.B.P. The indication of lack of faith in those who heard the Lord in Nazareth is that they began to use human reasoning.

J.T. Quite so. We can well discern, in looking back on the history, what was involved in the way that Christianity was spurned in the early days and hence the entire rejection of the Jewish system, because that is what really happened after this epistle. The epistle implied the word and the One who spoke it; hence, there is no forgiveness in Hebrews. Sin is wilful.

C.A.M. It seems to be a very large matter, because in verse 4 it says in connection with God's rest on the seventh day, "from all his works". Faith seems to connect all that immense matter in the beginning that you alluded to in your prayer with these matters that we are speaking of now.

J.T. The linking up of that with the book of Exodus is significant, because it is a question of Moses, and the Lord makes the issue between the Jews and himself, and between them and Moses, identical. The Lord says, "But if ye do not believe his writings, how shall ye believe my words?" John 5:47. That is, He links up His own authority, God's authority, with Moses, because it is a question of not only what is spoken but what is written.

C.A.M. It gives you a great sense of what a mighty thing this matter of faith is, to be able to link up these things spiritually, does it not?

J.T. It is a manifest fact here that "we have had glad tidings presented to us, even as they also". Notice, it is not simply information or history but glad tidings, as if God were to couch His thoughts in that way, make them attractive, fitting in with the evangelical feature of the inauguration of Christianity. It was a question of glad tidings. This section is not simply the glad tidings of our salvation. That is mentioned earlier in the epistle, but the glad tidings about heaven, by those who witnessed the thing.

J.A.P. Peter says, "Simon Peter, bondman and apostle of Jesus Christ, to them that have received like precious faith", 2 Peter 1:1, and then later, "use diligence to make your calling and election sure", 2 Peter 1:10. Does that call for exercise on my part to be in the good of what Peter is saying about partaking of the divine nature?

J.T. Just so. He says in his first epistle that those who preached the glad tidings to you preached it by the Holy Spirit sent down from heaven. The Lord Jesus preached it as come down from heaven, but the Spirit is seen as sent down from heaven. He says, "those who have declared to you the glad tidings by the Holy Spirit, sent from heaven", 1 Peter 1:12. I think it directs us to the feelings of

God, the feelings He has, the tender feelings He has in making known His mind, that He couches it in glad tidings and in the preaching by authoritative persons by the Holy Spirit sent down from heaven.

C.N. Could the assembly in any way be regarded as God's rest? I was thinking of the revelation to Peter, and the Lord saying on that account, "On this rock I will build my assembly, and hades' gates shall not prevail against it", Matthew 16:18. I just wondered if, in thinking of God's rest, the assembly could be looked at in a typical way.

J.T. The assembly is constituted in that way, as affording provisional shelter and conditions for the thoughts of God. What are hidden in the form of promise or purpose are now made provisional by the Spirit come down from heaven. The things are made provisionally available in the reality of them by the Spirit, for He is the earnest of the inheritance. The things are made substantially available in an order of things which we call the assembly. It is such, it is so constituted as to make available the promises and purposes of God in a tangible way to us. I think that is the way it works out -- the tangibility of the things that have been in promise or in purpose are now available to us in this institution called the assembly, because of what is said of it when the revelation was made to Peter, how intact it would be in carrying down these things in a provisional way until the time of the things being completed when the Lord comes.

C.N. So that the highest order of speaking would be expected from that vessel, would you say?

J.T. I think from the way it is presented to us in the epistles, the apostolic epistles, and again in Revelation we can see how trustworthy it is, just as the ark was of old; how trustworthy it was for the purpose for which it was made, to carry things through. So it is that the assembly may be depended upon to

carry things through in a tangible sense, in a provisional way until the time comes for the absolute fulfilment of them; for the rest of God is in heaven, of course, for us, but the thing is available to us while we are moving on to the light.

D.P. Is the entering into His rest a collective idea?

J.T. I think what we are speaking of is a collective idea. It is formed of the saints. It is important to bear in mind what they are, as typified in the material that formed the ark. It was made of acacia -- that kind of wood, reliable wood, for a certain purpose, but presently going on into an eternal state of things, because things changed. After the tabernacle we have another order of things, but the same idea, in Solomon's building. It represented the full or complete thing; Solomon's building contemplated the complete thing in type, whereas the tabernacle was a type of the durability, the lasting character of the thing, and how available and near it was brought to the saints.

C.A.M. Referring to what you said about the assembly and what we reach in the assembly, is it not remarkable that the first rest alluded to in the scriptures in the beginning of Genesis was reached when God brought in manhood? The rest in Numbers was the heavenly inheritance. Both these things are in the assembly, are they not?

J.T. The rest in Exodus is connected with God Himself being refreshed. It is connected with the refreshment of God. That adds to what we are saying, that the provisional state of things is said to be in the Spirit, because He is the earnest of the thing, the earnest of the inheritance. He is the earnest of everything, whether promise or purpose. He makes good everything, but there is added in Exodus to what is said in Genesis, that God was refreshed on the seventh day, which would point now to what is available for us provisionally, the

idea of refreshment; that there is refreshment, for instance, at a time like this; as we start in we are poor in a way and disjointed and we are really not fit to form an intact position. It takes time to merge so that the Spirit gets His place amongst us, and as He does the thing becomes fixed. It is a permanent thing provisionally. This all adds to what God is in His consideration for us, how He considers for us in the little while that enters into the passage from Egypt to Canaan. There is no time lost.

A.P.T. As they came out of Egypt, although they did come out in rank, there was the possibility that they carried a lot with them that God was not pleased with. That is the danger. One feels oneself the inability by not taking the word of God to allow it to cut off all that we should not bring with us, in order to have right function.

J.T. Quite so. Then as you say, they went out arrayed five in a rank. That is so much to the good, but it was only very little as against the conditions they had to meet, so that the time of passing through the Red Sea itself and what happened after that was always, as it were, settling in. There was so much to be contended with that needed to settle in. Then you have the great stress laid on keeping the commandments in Exodus 15, and the statutes and judgments, and added to that what would tend to buoyancy and victory but all preliminary before we reach the final thought of organisation at Mount Sinai. We have to wait for certain things. Therefore, the twelve springs of water and the seventy palm trees added greatly in the settling-in condition. Then what follows after that is the manna coming down from heaven.

Rem. They encamped there near the water.

J.T. They did, but they went on after that. After the manna they went on and encamped in the wilderness of Sin that is before Sinai. They encamped there and the battle of Rephidim took place there;

that is to say, to make room for the Spirit. The Spirit was not yet fully recognised typically, but that battle seemed to settle it. God says, I am going to settle this matter of distraction. From generation to generation I will make war with Amalek. It is the settling-in that we are slow in forming in our meetings. We often wait for five or ten minutes and there is no need for it. There is the lack of settling-in and the enjoyment of assembly conditions is deferred to that extent.