Acts 3:11; 1 Timothy 6:12; Philippians 3:11 - 14

I wish to speak of several things that, according to the passage of scripture I read, are to be laid hold of: if any have not laid hold of them, that they may do so; and those of us who have, that we may continue to hold them and explore them. The first is fellowship, the second is eternal life and the third is the calling on high of God.

Fellowship is involved in the passage I read from Acts. It has a distinctive place in that book and we read that the early converts persevered in it. The second chapter shows that there was a large number of converts; it was the firstfruits of the Spirit through apostolic preaching, Peter being the first to preach. According to Matthew he has the first place, "First, Simon". He had well nigh forfeited it, from outward appearances at least; but the Lord had laid hold of him when he was a fisherman and said He would make him a fisher of men, which he did. Peter as a disciple of Christ failed most seriously, but before he failed the Lord said "I have besought for thee". That is a very comforting thing. A failure is never to be excused, but if the Lord prays for us His prayer is heard, and He is said to be a great High Priest over the house of God, and we have Him: "having a great priest over the house of God, let us approach with a true heart", (Hebrews 10:21.) Of course, He has us, but we have Him, and He is available as a Priest. He is a High Priest above and intercedes for us as Scripture says, "Who also intercedes for us", (Romans 8:34.) The Holy Spirit also intercedes for us, and we are to intercede for one another. So that we can thank God for the wonderful

system of intercession we have, first what is in Christ, then in the Spirit and then in the saints. We are all thus wonderfully well off. But we are to avail ourselves of what there is, and having a great High Priest let us draw near; we can ask Him to help us, and He is ready to help us. He helped Peter; He said, "I have besought for thee that thy faith fail not", (Luke 22:32.) So that Peter was secured for the service of God. The Lord had laid hold of him for it, and He would not let Him go; He secured Him. So that he stands up after the Holy Spirit came down from heaven and preached the first gospel recorded after the advent of the Spirit, with the greatest results of any that we know-three thousand persons They were genuinely affected, and we are told that they persevered in the leading Christian characteristics; they were real believers, convicted people who wanted to be saved, and Peter told them how to be saved. It is interesting to note the answer that he gave them as compared with the answer that Paul and Silas gave to the jailer. But Peter's converts, we are told, persevered in the apostles' teaching and fellowship and breaking of bread and prayers. That is the point I am thinking of in chapter 2.

In this chapter it is not three thousand, it is just one convert. If as much were made of each of the three thousand in chapter 2 as of this one, we should have, I may say, a whole Bible full of facts about them. But this single convert in chapter 3 has a great place. We do not get his name, but we do get what implies his name, that he was a persevering man. Peter and John were used of God for his conversion. God used the two greatest men on earth at that time to convert a man of no consequence whatever to the great men of the world of that day. He was a liability on the community; he sat at the gate of the temple asking alms. He was a liability and not a producer, and yet, as I said, heaven employed the two greatest men on earth at that time to convert this man, to secure him

for God. Peter says to him, 'I cannot help you on your own line'. There are those who want to come into christianity on their own terms, and to come into fellowship is under the Lord's control; the heavenly city has gates, and there are porters at the gates, and hence divine requirements must be met. Nor did this man get in on his own terms, on his own line. What was his line? Begging. Lameness marked him; begging marked him, his very look would imply the word 'beg'.

Peter says to him, "Look on us". They did not say what they might have said: We represent what is greatest in the universe; we represent God and Christ and the Spirit: salvation, eternal life, and the gift of the Spirit are available to all. They did not say these things to him. When the Lord Jesus began to preach He did not say these things. He said to His hearers, "The time is fulfilled and the kingdom of God has drawn nigh; repent and believe in the glad tidings", (Mark 1:15) as much as to say, You will find out what is in it if you look into it. "Believe in the glad tidings", the Lord says: accept them as a whole and explore them. Peter and John did not tell this man everything; he is to deliver the message. Peter says, "Look on us.... Silver and gold I have not"; that is to say, 'I cannot deal with you on your own terms; I have no money and you are looking for money'. "Silver and gold I have not; but what I have, I give to thee", (Acts 3:6).

A christian is not worth the name of christian if he has not something spiritual. Peter says 'Such as I have', not simply what God has or what Christ has, but what I have; he had something. He says, "In the name of Jesus Christ the Nazarene rise up and walk. And having taken hold of him by the right hand ..." He knew which hand to take; Peter uses his hand often; he was a fisherman. Now he takes hold of this man's hand, and the man

rose up and leaped and stood and walked and praised God. That is how this chapter presents the truth to us, and the verse I read is to show that this man was holding the persons whom God had used to bless him; he was holding them. You remember the man in the porch of Bethesda whom the Lord Jesus raised up: He said to him, "Take up thy couch and walk". The man went away with his couch and did not even know the Lord Jesus; he did not know where the Lord went, he could say very little about him. This man was different; he held Peter and John. You might say, perhaps John held him. He would if it were necessary, but it was not necessary; he represents an ardent convert, one who was genuinely converted, who is prepared to go in for all there is in the gospel and the consequences thereof. He was standing up holding these two men, and they were under fierce persecution. As the stormy blast of persecution struck them he stood by them, but in this verse it says he held them. He wanted to be identified with them in the fullest possible way. He was no mere nominal professor in fellowship; he was really in it and a contributor to the fellowship; he laid hold of it.

That is my first point. We are not worthy of the name of christian if we are not real christians. Think of this man after he arose and leaped and walked, with his ankle bones made strong, going off to a football match! It is impossible to think of him so inconsistent. Peter and John are my companions, he would say; the heavenly representatives, the servants of God. None of these other things are good enough for me, I belong to heaven; I want fellowship, I want the meetings and the Bible readings and the ministry. I belong to Christ, I am no earth-dweller. This man would not understand these things yet he would say, in effect, I am a genuine christian, I am thoroughly with these two men; I am holding Peter with my right hand and John with my left hand, as it were. He was a real testimony; he was the

cause of the persecution, but the religious authorities could not deny the power that raised that man.

Let us face these things as to what christianity is to us, as to whether or not we are shams. This man held the apostles. Think of the space the Spirit of God gives to one man! There were three thousand converts in the previous chapter but as we have said, the space given to them is very small indeed. As John says of the Lord, "There are also many other things which Jesus did, the which if they were written one by one ... not even the world itself would contain the books written". So that there is very little said comparatively, of the three thousand, but this is said of them, that they "persevered in the teaching and fellowship of the apostles, in breaking of bread and prayers". What a contrast that is to those who give up the breaking of bread, to those who tell their brethren, I am withdrawing! Withdrawing from what? Withdrawing from God and heaven. They might as well say, I am turning my back on God, because that is what they are doing. But this man's face is towards heaven. In a sense there was not a more interesting man in the whole city of Jerusalem than this man at that time. All the people saw him; what a testimony he was! He had been well known before; but the idea of the truth and the fellowship is that whereas he had been the subject of sin, now he is the subject of the work of God. He was true to the position locally and to the responsibility attaching to it; he held Peter and held John, meaning that he was thoroughly in fellowship; as Ruth said to Naomi, "Thy people shall be my people, and thy God my God; where thou diest will I die, and there will I be buried".

These two men represented Jesus Christ, the despised, the rejected One, and this man says, They are my companions. The point now is whether we are availing ourselves of this fellowship, holding to it. What kind of a fellowship is it? The first letter to the Corinthians gives

us its characteristics, as also John's first epistle. It is the fellowship of God's Son. Jesus Christ our Lord. Are you going to leave that fellowship? There is no greater folly than that. It is the fellowship of God's Son and God has called you into it. Think of the privilege and protection of it, the joy and the life of it; the fellowship of God's Son and the fellowship of the brethren! Can I afford to be without the brethren? Can I afford to make little of them if I am professedly one of them? If I do, the Lord is stronger than I; and He is jealous if I am making little of His fellowship, that into which I am called.

The next thing is eternal life as spoken of in 1 Timothy 6. Now the subject of eternal life is one of the most important in the Scriptures. It is spoken of very early- the tree of life is an allusion to it. The tree of life was not guarded at the outset, nor was the tree of the knowledge of good and evil; but after Adam and Eve transgressed they were driven out of the garden and the Cherubim and a flaming sword were set towards the east of the garden of Eden to guard the way to the tree of life, lest they should return and eat of the tree of life and live forever in their sins. It would be a disaster. God says, It must not be. Let no-one think he can have eternal life on those lines. Adam and Eve were driven out from the garden and from the tree of life; they could never get back as they were. Man can only be recovered by death, and the Lord Jesus has come into this works to resolve the great question of good and evil; He dies and brought life and incorruptibility to light through the gospel.

John makes much of that in saying that God so loved the world. It seems as though when John got to that theme in the chapter, he said I will stop here; I must stop here and dwell on this wonderful theme of love. Verse 14 of chapter 3 is a wonderful text: "As Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, thus must the Son

of man be lifted up, that every one who believes on him may not perish, but have life eternal". That is the first thing-"as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness". In the wilderness people were dying all around; their carcasses were strewn there because of man's will; they had refused the pleasant land. The gospel of heaven was preached to them, the gospel of the land, and their hearts became hardened. They hardened them. Let no one here be on that line of hardening his heart; "Harden not your hearts", it says in Hebrews 4It is within your range to harden your heart; the devil helps by worldliness, by earthly mindedness, so that the heart becomes stony; the meetings of the brethren thus become affected if attended in a perfunctory way. You are responsible for it if your heart becomes hardened. That was how it stood with the children of Israel, and so God says to them, 'Not one of those persons who have seen My signs in Egypt shall enter into My land except two men, Caleb and Joshua'. Two men out of six hundred thousand! Those who died in the wilderness did not get the dignified name of 'bodies'; it says "their carcasses" were strewn there. That is the impression of heaven, the reproach of the name of carcasses for those who fell in their lawlessness, in disregard of the gospel of God in the Wilderness.

But now God says, I will make a way of life; they are not all to die in the wilderness, the children are going in. One generation passes away and another comes; "These shall go away", says the Lord, "into eternal punishment, and the righteous into eternal life", (Matthew 25:46.) Which way will you go? As to the generation that follows, God says in mercy, the children shall go in; there is a promise to the children. And God says, I will lift up this brazen serpent; the word 'serpent' meaning that God is dealing with the evil at its source. So with the city whose situation was good but its water bad, Elisha deals with the source. He says, "Bring me a new cruse, and put salt in

it", (2 Kings 2:20 - 22) and he casts it in at the source of the waters, and they were healed. God says, I must judge sin at its source; so He told Moses to make a serpent of brass and put it on a pole. Everyone could see that serpent of brass from the uttermost limits of the camp; it was on a pole, "lifted up", as Jesus was. Three times the Lord says in John that He would be lifted up -- what for? He was lifted up as Jesus to bear sins. "As Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, thus must the Son of man be lifted up, that every one who believes on him may not perish, but have life eternal. For God so loved the world, that he gave his only-begotten Son, that whosoever believes on him may not perish, but have life eternal" (John 3:14 - 16).

This matter of eternal life as set out in Timothy is not simply an objective matter that you believe and have it objectively; but it is within your range. As Paul wrote to Timothy, "Lay hold of eternal life", (1 Timothy 6:12) John says eternal life is in Christ Jesus, it is in the Son; that is to say, it is in a sure position, but it is not so put here. In this setting you may, as it were, put your hand out and take it. Of course this is a spiritual transaction. Why should I be spiritually dead when eternal life is within reach? In verse 19 of the same chapter the apostle says, "Lay hold of what is really life". These are most important matters, dear brethren that I am bringing before you, as to fellowship, and as to eternal life, and the purposes of God. Let us be real, let us be transparent. We read in Revelation of those that had gained the victory over the beast standing on a sea of glass, having harps of God. Why did they have harps and sing? Because they had overcome; they had overcome the beast and his image and the number of his name. They were men of energy, and they have harps and sing the song of Moses and the song of the Lamb, Revelation 15:2, 3. They are standing on the sea of glass triumphantly, they are victorious. God is pressing upon His people the

reality of the present moment: we are coming to the very limit of the dispensation, we are going to heaven in a moment, and He wants to take us up as those that please Him. Enoch had the testimony that he pleased God, and we all need to find out whether we are walking according to God and for his pleasure as we are about to be translated.

Well now, there is the third point in mind, "the calling on high of God". In (Philippians 3:11 - 14) the apostle says: "if any way I arrive at the resurrection from among the dead. Not that I have already obtained the prize, or am already perfected; but I pursue, if also I may get possession of it, seeing that also I have been taken possession of by Christ Jesus. Brethren I do not count to have got possession myself; but one thing -- forgetting the things behind, and stretching out to the things before, I pursue, looking towards the goal, for the prize of the calling on high of God in Christ Jesus". This requires the greatest effort of all -- that is the idea, it is energy exercised with a definite purpose. It is something before me that I see and earnestly want to reach. That is the language of this passage. The point to be attained is the resurrection from among the dead. You say I can hardly take in how a man can reach or attain to the resurrection from among the dead; one must die before he can reach that; but Paul is speaking of what is attainable while he was still alive in his body. If we do not understand it, let us ask the Lord who gives understanding in all things. What did Paul have in his mind when he tells us that he died daily? "Daily I die", he says, "by your boasting which I have in Christ Jesus our Lord", (1 Corinthians 15:31.) And again he says that in their tribulation in Asia, "We were excessively pressed beyond our power, so as to despair even of living. But we ourselves had the sentence of death in ourselves, that we should not have our trust in ourselves, but in God who raises the dead; who has delivered us from so great a death, and does deliver; in

whom we confide that he will also deliver", (2 Corinthians 1:8 - 10.) Think of the man who is speaking to us. He tells us, "I know a man in Christ". I wonder if we all know a man in Christ? Do I know a man in Christ? I just put that question simply. It is not in the second or third person, it must be myself. There is no other way of knowing a man in Christ but by knowing him to be yourself; it is conscious knowledge, see note on 2 Corinthians 12:2. It is a subjective condition, and you can only be understood subjectively. He said, "I know a man in Christ, fourteen years ago, (whether in the body, I know not, or out of the body I know not, God knows;) such a one caught up to the third heaven ... caught up into paradise, and heard unspeakable things said which it is not allowed to man to utter". (2 Corinthians 12:2 - 4.) It was indeed an extraordinary experience, but Paul for God's wise purpose was privileged to be the man to have it. And he says, I know that man.

And then he speaks in the passage before us here of laying hold of the resurrection, attaining to it, "if any way I arrive at the resurrection from among the dead". He means laying hold of it. The early christians understood what ecstasy meant. They set before us conditions that are possible, that is on the principle of laying hold of them, and it is what you get there; "if any way I arrive at the resurrection from among the dead;" that I might sense, even if but for a moment, what passing out of death into life is. I cannot define it to you, nor can anybody define it to you; in the same sense, you cannot define love, you have to realise it yourself and show it. It implies definiteness of purpose -- of laying oneself out for something to be supremely desired. So the apostle goes on, "Not that I have already obtained the prize ... but I pursue, if also I may get possession of it, seeing that also I have been taken possession of by Christ Jesus". The apostle's thought was to lay hold "of the calling on high

of God in Christ Jesus" not as a matter of light simply, but the apprehension and realisation of it in a spiritual way. The athletic figure expressed in stretching out, pursuing, looking towards the goal speaks strikingly of the reality of the apostle's experience. The goal when reached involved the prize of the calling on high of God in Christ Jesus. He saw Christ as He is now. He saw the Lord Jesus as He is in heaven. He says If I have known Christ after the flesh, I do not know him thus anymore; this is Christ up there, and we are to see Him up there now, apprehend Him as there. John says, "What we shall be has not yet been manifested; we know that if it is manifested we shall be like him, for we shall see him as he is". John comes near to Paul in this statement.

The great apostle, however, is admitting in Philippians that he had not come practically to the heavenly position of Christ to his own satisfaction; but he had had a glimpse of it; he says, "Have I not seen Jesus our Lord?" He had appeared to him, and Paul says, in effect, I would like to apprehend Him more clearly. He was not satisfied even with what he knew; there was more, so he goes on, "Brethren, I do not count to have got possession myself; but one thing -- forgetting the things behind, and stretching out to the things before, I pursue, looking towards the goal, for the prize of the calling on high of God in Christ Jesus" This is how he leaves us. With him this exercise would be continuous; he was like an athlete, indeed he uses that very symbol. Do I exercise myself like a man getting up in the morning and taking physical exercise? Paul sees the goal clearly, but he says, I am not at it, as still here it is a question of spiritual attainment as well as of light. No one who has not the Holy Spirit can understand this; the calling of God is not theirs, but it is ours in title, and the apostle Paul is telling us how we may attain to it. We want to get into that race. He says, there is a goal I am aiming at, but I have not reached it yet. Then he speaks of "the

prize"; the goal is the athletic mark, the goal is not the prize, the prize is mine as I reach the goal. The goal is the point fixed in the race; the prize is "the calling on high of God in Christ Jesus". What a wonderful thought! The apostle tells us later in this chapter that the Lord Jesus is coming to transform out bodies, that they may be fashioned like unto His body of glory. That literally involves the prize. To reach that now is full christianity, the great objective for the believer. It calls for putting out the hand in the way of energy and aiming at things. If you do not reach them -- keep on. It is continual exercise that brings about the result -- "the prize of the calling on high of God in Christ Jesus".

LISTENING TO CHRIST

Luke 10:39

In Mary is seeing a person who has a sound mind, and she is using it; she is sitting at the feet of Jesus, hearing His word. That is what I want you to recognise. You can use your mind in no better way than listening to Christ. We are living in a day of many books; it is the printing age; but books have been used to shut out Christ from the mind. The mind must certainly be fed, but God has given us a right mind, and that mind must be ministered to. But how ministered to? I think you see it in Mary. Supposing you had come to Mary with a novel as she sat at the feet of Jesus, what would she have thought of you? She would have said to you, No product of man's mind can minister to mine, you cannot feed my mind with that; you may feed the swine with that. The prodigal in the far country "he longed to fill his belly with the husks which the swine were eating", but he was not satisfied. Mary was not going to feed upon that; she had a divinely given mind, it was a right one, and she would feed it on Christ. It was not simply that He was saying something to her. She was listening to what he was saying; if He spoke to Martha, she heard it; or if He spoke to Lazarus she heard it. You want to hear every word of Christ, not only what He has to say to you. It is a question of the mind; the divinely given mind has to be ministered to, and the Lord Jesus has spoken, and is speaking, and the thing for us is to listen to what He is saying. There are many voices in the world; there is the pulpit, and the platform, and the press; but if you have a right mind, you will listen alone to Christ. What does Mary learn from Christ? Do you think the Lord would limit anything -- do you think He would hold anything back from one who listened to Him? No; it was the delight of His heart to speak in her hearing all that was in His mind.

Oh, beloved, think of the mind of Christ! -- think of the infinite richness of the mind, coming out from the Father, freighted with all the Father's affections in the one hand, and with all the Father's thoughts on the other hand! She was listening to what He was saying. He came out from God to make known what was in the mind of God; He was opening up that, and Mary is singled out by the Spirit as the example of a right-minded person, and the proof of it is that she listened to Christ. That is simple christianity -- to listen to Christ.

May we then be like Mary -- restful. I would remind you of the beautiful touch in John 11. Of Mary it is said, She "sat in the house"; she had a habit of being quiet. Whilst Martha rushed out to meet the Lord, Mary remained till He called for her: "The teacher is come and calls thee". May the Lord give us that restfulness of spirit, and then to listen to what He is saying.

THE KINGDOM OF GOD (1)

Romans 1:1 - 7; Romans 5:1 - 5, 20, 21; Exodus 19:1 - 6

J.T. It is thought well to look into the subject of the kingdom of God. It may seem odd that in connection with the kingdom of God we should read from a book that mentions it formally only once -- in chapter 14. References to the kingdom in the epistles as compared with the gospels are very few, but this apparent difficulty is because the epistles treat directly of the kingdom of God as it is in its present form, and that the thing exists, whereas the gospels contemplate it as in the future; that is yet to come. The Lord taught the disciples to pray, saying "... thy kingdom come", Luke 11:3; and He preached that the kingdom of the heavens was at hand, Matthew 4:17 Later however, He told the Jews that the kingdom of God was in the midst of them, Luke 17:21; but this alluded to His own presence there. But the epistles, as was remarked, contemplate it as existent in the saints, Christ being in heaven and the Holy Spirit being on earth. That is the reason, it is thought, for the paucity of the mention of the kingdom in the epistles: that it actually exists, not only in Christ but also in the saints; not in name only but in substance and character, Christ being in heaven and the Holy Spirit being on earth. In no scripture is it more treated of than in Romans, and that is why these three scriptures in that epistle were read. Chapter 1 brings in the King Himself; that is, from the standpoint of His relations with David. In this sense it corresponds with Matthew, for Matthew begins with Him in this relation: "Book of the generation of Jesus Christ, Son of David, Son of Abraham". (Matthew 1:1). And when we come to the genealogy David is mentioned as "the king". Romans speaks of Christ's identification with David: "... come of David's seed according to flesh, marked out Son of God in power, according to the

Spirit of holiness, by the resurrection of the dead", verses 3, 4. So that His kingship is implied -- the Son is King -- which is according to Psalm 2; and then the epistle treats of the principles of the kingdom. In chapter 14 the kingdom of God is mentioned to bring out its characteristics -- "righteousness, and peace, and joy in the Holy Spirit". In the early part of the book the principles of the kingdom are in mind. Much more is in mind than indicated in what has been read, so that we may need another reading on this book. It is thought now that practicalness of the thing should be seen, and that is worked out in the early part both as to sins and sin; how the principles of the kingdom are resolved -- how sin and righteousness are resolved -- making way for the Holy Spirit. And we shall do well, I think, to confine ourselves as much as possible to the initial thoughts indicated, especially as to the principles; for it is in these that we are defective.

A.N.W. Will you link that with the verse in Exodus?

J.T. The working out of the kingdom in Exodus is, in principle the same as it is in Romans. The kingdom is assumed to be there in chapter 19. It is indeed assumed in chapter 15 where we have the celebration of victory in the overthrow of the Egyptians. Jehovah is formally alluded to as King there, but the song involves the kingdom; the effect of it is in what God had done. He was a Man of war and what He had done is brought out. War is waged. It needed to be waged, so as to reach the ground of the kingdom. We are out of Egypt, and then the kingdom is seen in the song, and in chapter 19 God says, "Ye have seen what I have done to the Egyptians, and how I have borne you on eagles' wings and brought you to myself"; and then He speaks of what His proposals are: much as to principle in the covenant and what follows, involving obedience. The whole point in the initial features is the question of

obedience; and that greatly enters into our circumstances in this day and generally too.

D.R. You spoke of the help it might be to the young to consider this subject. Is it not remarkable that they are only three months out of Egypt when God proposes this to Israel?

J.T. That brings up the question of time, which is carefully observed in the types; whereas, in the New Testament time is not a prime matter; that is, the formal mention of it. It is remarkable how few actual dates are given; so that the idea would be that we are to know that the things mentioned have happened; not when a certain thing happened, but that it has happened. In Matthew and Luke, following the Old Testament, there are dates relative to the birth of the Lord and the beginning of His ministry, these being based on the lives of certain officials, but in the other gospels and the Acts and epistles there is very little said as to time.

R.W.S. Do I understand there is a state amongst us, which at this time requires this ministry of the kingdom?

J.T. Well, it has been inferred that there is such a state -- a state of disobedience, especially in the young, and in some of the sisters. But that will have to come up in time. You can see in the types how formally it was stated. The time is given; the third month after they came out of Egypt. They had departed from Rephidim, that is, after the incoming of the Spirit typically. They came to the wilderness of Sinai, which is to be heard of later, because the law is given there. They encamped in the wilderness, meaning they are taking up a position suitable for the moment. "And Israel encamped there before the mountain", (Exodus 19:2.) These things are to be noted. "And Moses went up to God, and Jehovah called to him out of the mountain, saying. Thus shalt thou say to the house of Jacob, and tell the children of Israel: Ye have seen what I have done to the Egyptians,

and how I have borne you on eagles' wings and brought you to myself. And now, if ye will hearken to my voice indeed and keep my covenant, then shall ye be my own possession out of all the peoples -- for all the earth is mine -- and ye shall be to me a kingdom of priests, and a holy nation. These are the words which thou shall speak to the children of Israel", verses 3 - 6. Then, of course, we know what follows. The people profess to be obedient and God goes on with them on that principle. So it is always: if He is to go on with us there must be something in the nature of a covenant or agreement, or, as it were, a vow, a profession of fealty to God. I think all this is very important to keep before us.

C.A.M. You referred earlier to the King Himself, as seen in Romans 1; there is an expression in 1 Timothy, "King of the ages", alluding to God Himself. How would you connect that with the subject in hand?

J.T. I expect that will need to be in the last reading!

C.A.M. That is a long way ahead.

J.T. Do you not think yourself it should be put off?

C.A.M. Well that impresses me with the fact that the passage is a very wonderful feature of our subject.

J.T. Quite so; but the reference you make to king-ship in Romans 1 is to be carried forward, because of the relation with David; "... come of David's seed according to flesh", meaning the line is there from that point of view. The line is to be set up in this Person. And then it says, "... marked out Son of God in power, according to the Spirit of holiness, by resurrection of the dead". The King is equal to the position. He is a divine Person, but a divine Person in sonship; in that relation He is King. But it is a question now of the kingdom in its present form and, therefore, it is not Jesus Christ our King, but Jesus Christ "our Lord". There are those who own Him to be that; not simply that God says He is that, but He is owned to be that -- our Lord. That is the profession every one of us should

make, and when we are converted we do make it. We confess "Jesus as Lord".

A.R. In Acts 2 Peter says God has made Him Lord and Christ.

J.T. That is what God has done, and then the Spirit has come down. "Having therefore been exalted by the right hand of God, and having received of the Father the promise of the Holy Spirit, he has poured out this which ye behold and hear", (Acts 2:33.) That is the establishment of the kingdom here on earth, because the Person here on earth is equally divine. He is equal with the Lord in heaven.

C.N. The disciples asked the Lord, "Is it at this time that thou restorest the kingdom to Israel?" His answer was, "It is not yours to know times or seasons, which the Father has placed in his own authority; but ye will receive power, the Holy Spirit having come upon you". Does that indicate how the kingdom is set up at the present time?

J.T. Yes. The stress is laid, as you have often observed, on the Spirit. The disciples wanted to know about the kingdom, whether it should be restored to Israel. They would be thinking just of what had been before; that is, in David and others. But the Lord's word is, as seen here, "It is not yours to know times or seasons, which the Father has placed in his own authority; but ye will receive power, the Holy Spirit having come upon you", (Acts 1:7,8.) That is the point. They might have questioned the Lord and said. Well, we want to know definitely. We often hear such questions in readings, whereas it is not always wise to break things up. The Lord did not break up the subject that they introduced. He said that it is the Father's matter. He could have said to them. You are thinking of yourselves and your own kingdom; whereas there is something else. It is a universal matter; the kingdom of God, not the kingdom of Israel. That is what is before us now.

A.N.W. In that way, is "Son of God in power, according to the Spirit of holiness" over against David's seed "according to flesh"? Is that how it stands in Romans 1?

J.T. Just so. It brings in holiness; no doubt to lay the basis for the truth of the Son of God. He was "the holy one of God", according to Peter's confession of Him in John 6, which implies that He was the High Priest. And now it is the Spirit of holiness, which involves the service of God, opened up in Hebrews.

A.R. In Exodus 19 it is a kingdom of priests.

J.T. Just so. That was God's thought. He told Moses to say to Pharaoh, "Let my son go, that he may serve me", showing how these thoughts were in God's heart, but we do not get everything at once. Things have to be deferred often, and that enters into what the Lord said to the disciples in Acts 1, but He added, "But ye will receive power, the Holy Spirit having come upon you, and ye shall be my witnesses both in Jerusalem, and in all Judaea and Samaria, and to the end of the earth", verse 8. The point is "my witnesses"; not your kingdom, nor the kingdom restored to Israel, but what the Lord Jesus will do; what He is to say; what is to be said about Him. Therefore, our epistle reads, "Paul, bondman of Jesus Christ, a called apostle, separated to God's glad tidings, (which he had before promised by his prophets in holy writings,) concerning his Son" -- concerning Jesus; that is the point, and the disciples should start with that.

Question. Would the features of the kingdom come to light now in persons who are subject to the Spirit?

J.T. Yes; but that will come up in the first passage read in chapter 5. Before it we must consider the question as to obedience, "... for obedience of faith among all the nations, among whom are ye also the called of Jesus Christ" -- the kind of obedience, the

obedience of faith; not what will accrue from the millennial testimony. That will be a question of sight, but now it is obedience of faith.

A.B.P. Do the principles of the kingdom apply to our every sphere and relationship of life?

J.T. I think so; that, I hope, will come out. As we open up the hortatory part of the epistle I think we shall see that the various spheres of responsibility are in mind. There is one thing one might say, and that is that the household position is not raised much in Romans, although the basis for it is there.

A.N.W. How does the kingdom authority stand in relation to assembly authority?

J.T. I would say that really belongs to Corinthians. I believe we shall find that that is the way the truth stands there -- how the kingdom affects the assembly. The assembly is the prominent thought. The kingdom is subservient to that, as we shall see in the Corinthian epistles. We hardly get the assembly in this epistle, except in the end where it is spoken of as a mystery. The assembly is just touched on. Otherwise it is only seen in chapter 12; as in the sense of "one body in Christ"; it is not exactly the body of Christ; the "one body" is seen later.

F.S.C. Would there be a difference between what Paul preached in Damascus and what he preached in Rome? He preached in Damascus directly that Jesus is the Son of God.

J.T. He was not under commission then, although in Galatians he says, "God ... was pleased to reveal his Son in me, that I may announce him as glad tidings among the nations", chapter 1:16. That agrees with what he preached at Damascus, but you can hardly say he was under commission until he and Barnabas set out from Antioch as seen in Acts 13. But as we have said, his preaching in Damascus was in accord with his epistle to the Romans.

J.T.Jr. Is he a model subject of the kingdom in that he alludes to his bondmanship?

J.T. Just so. It shows it marked himself. The word 'bondman' conveys not simply a servant, but a slave.

A.A.T. Obedience of faith in Romans: I can understand that in connection with the initial work of God in a soul, but do you apply it all through one's life?

J.T. Certainly. Faith must run right through until the time of sight comes, which is after we are raised from the dead; when we are raised from the dead literally. Even resurrection in a spiritual sense is on the principle of faith in Colossians: "raised ... through faith of the working of God", (Colossians 2:12.) So that the time of faith does not cease until we are raised from the dead literally. It is a faith period, and so in the beginning of Acts it is said that the disciples saw the Lord go up: "And having said these things he was taken up, they beholding him, and a cloud received him out of their sight", verse 9. That is the beginning of the faith period. It is not sight any more; I mean literal sight: "they beholding him"; He is taken out of their sight. Now He is seen by faith. It is on the principle of faith by the Spirit.

J.W. Do you think Romans 16 gives a list of persons marked by obedience of faith? Paul says, "For your obedience has reached to all", verse 19.

J.T. Yes. And so here his apostleship was for "obedience of faith among all the nations, among whom are ye also the called of Jesus Christ", (Romans 1:5, 6.) This implied that the Romans had faith. They are addressed as already having faith, and hence in the kingdom. Now, you are quoting chapter 16: "For your obedience has reached to all". That was a prime point; the thing existed that he was preaching. He is, therefore, simply opening up what exists in the principles of the kingdom.

D.R. What place has the Spirit in relation to this

obedience? The Spirit is given to all that obey Him. What relation has that with the kingdom?

J.T. That leads to chapter 5. If the brethren are clear we will pass on to that chapter: "The love of God is shed abroad in our hearts by the Holy Spirit which has been given to us", verse 5. It is a present thing. But it has to be understood. The epistle is to enlarge on what already existed. The kingdom was a real thing at Rome, but every item of it is enlarged on in this epistle.

A.R. "No one can say. Lord Jesus, unless in the power of the Holy Spirit", (1 Corinthians 12:3.) Is that the same idea?

J.T. That is the same idea only it is connected with the assembly in Corinthians.

F.H.L. Are you considering this thought of obedience as to the King Himself? Psalm 45 brings out evidences of this.

J.T. Quite so. "He is thy Lord, and worship thou him". We are not only to be subject to Him, but to worship Him.

F.H.L. I was wondering if these features of obedience of the bondman take character from the Head of the kingdom. Are we to carry that in mind throughout?

J.T. I am sure that is true. Headship is worked out of what is exemplary. The Lord Himself was a bondman, and we learn bondmanship from Him, but I would say it is in the sense in which He is exemplary of the divine traits. So that it says, for instance, in chapter 15: "But we ought, we that are strong, to bear the infirmities of the weak, and not to please ourselves. Let each one of us please his neighbour with a view to what is good, to edification. For the Christ also did not please himself; but according as it is written. The reproaches of them that reproach thee have fallen upon me", verses 1 - 3. That is the way we arrive at headship -- what is exemplary in Christ, in me. Viewed as Man He is the subject One. He exemplifies subjection. He leads in it.

D.R. Is Peter speaking of this feature of the kingdom when he says the saints are elect by sanctification of the Spirit, unto the obedience and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ, 1 Peter 1:2?

J.T. Quite so; it supports what we are saying. Now, before we get to the idea of the Spirit in chapter 5, we have to touch a little on righteousness, as leading in the principles of the kingdom; how the matter of righteousness is worked out. In the kingdom we have the solution of moral things and righteousness stands first as we see in chapter 14, as already noted. It is introduced in Genesis, and it is carried through here in Abraham and David. They are exemplary of this point and hence the whole matter of the gospel comes up in chapters 3 and 4, because it is a question of the solution of things; how the thing is verified in the kingdom and is enforced too, in power. It is seen by example; seen in Abraham and David, and now in the Roman Christians. They themselves are examples of it.

C.A.M. Would it be right to ask now about the moral questions you alluded to -- the matter of sins and sin?

J.T. Yes; they are involved in the principles of the kingdom. We have already touched on righteousness. We have it in chapter 1. Paul says there, "I am not ashamed of the glad tidings; for it is God's power to salvation, to every one that believes, both to Jew first and to Greek: for righteousness of God is revealed therein, on the principle of faith, to faith: according as it is written. But the just shall live by faith", verses 16,17. Here the great principle of faith is brought up, known and witnessed to in the Old Testament. It is brought forward from Habakkuk: "The just shall live by his faith", (Habakkuk 2:4.) Salvation is bound up with righteousness by faith, all working out in the glad tidings. Righteousness is revealed in the glad tidings. Wrath of God is also revealed -- not in the glad tidings, but from heaven. We have to stop to think of those things. Chapter 2 is the

question of man. That has to be touched on. "Therefore thou art inexcusable, O man, every one who judgest, for in that in which thou judgest another, thou condemnest thyself; for thou that judgest doest the same things", verse 1. In this chapter we have some light as to man; the race, not the Jews. It is, "O man". They were given up to judging one another. The Greeks, for instance, became critics of the whole race and others were barbarians. All bears on the subject of the kingdom. This question of man is a matter of importance, because we have to preach it. We belong to the human race. We are not Jews. We are apt to be as natural men, given to judgment of one another; hateful and hating one another. The kingdom of God meets these conditions. The next thing is the question of righteousness; how every man is brought in guilty; the matter is solved in part in every one being brought in guilty.

A.B.P. Do the glad tidings bring in a totally different character of righteousness, the righteousness of God being something entirely new, in the glad tidings?

J.T. Yes. And so the point of righteousness taken up in chapter 3 is after the Jew is brought in. We have, "If thou art named a Jew", chapter 2:17. And in verse 29 we are told who the true Jew is. And in chapter 3 we have the enquiry, "What then is the superiority of the Jew?" That is a question to be touched on, too. It is important because the Jew has been thrust into peculiar prominence among the nations lately. In chapter 3 he is with every man brought in guilty before God. This makes way for the gospel, thus 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", (Romans 3:21, 22.) So that this is the prime fundamental of the gospel -- how this is effected. It is being resolved -- the question of this kind of righteousness.

R.W.S. Why is it 'of'? It is not by faith in Jesus Christ, but by faith of Jesus Christ.

J.T. It is that kind of faith; the believer being in that. The faith is linked up with Jesus Christ. It is through faith in His blood. That is, the blood is an object of faith.

C.A.M. In that way, our side of the faith question is dealt with more in the next chapter, is it not?

J.T. That is right, because in Abraham and David we come to the thing worked out, but in chapter 3 it is set out from God's side, but the element of faith must be interwoven in the matter.

C.A.M. Would you say another word as to the righteousness of God? It is one of the main thoughts that God has resolved this question of righteousness Himself.

J.T. That is right. It begins in verse 21. It can be said in the millennium that a person acquires righteousness and salvation just through Christ, without saying anything about the faith of Jesus Christ. That word 'of' and the faith connected with it is a feature of our dispensation. It makes much of our dispensation that this is stressed. This book especially brings that out; what this dispensation is, and how different it is even from the coming one. You have these 'ofs' and 'ins' to stress the element of faith, hardly mentioned in the Old Testament, but it is there, and now it is mentioned constantly in these chapters.

C.N. In the early chapters of Acts the teachings of the apostles constantly refer to the position of the Lord Jesus Christ and the things that were received and done in His name and by His name. Is that helpful?

J.T. Just so. "... The faith which is by him", for instance.

A.R. It is faith in the blood; the fact that God has accepted the blood of Christ is the basis of all?

J.T. Well, yes; and then, where the blood is. Therefore, the types help us. It is not only the blood but

where it is. And, therefore, we have the word 'mercy-seat' alluding to the position of the ark in the tabernacle. We are directed, in the reference to the mercy-seat, back to Exodus, and that God had in His mind the position of the blood; not simply that Christ shed it when the spear-pierced His side, but the blood was put in a certain place. The tabernacle helps us in that sense. The blood was shed at the cross without any thought where it was, but from God's side the thing must be in a certain place. As it were, that precious blood will not be allowed to be spilled on the earth.

A.N.W. You have led us along from chapters 1, 2 and 3. Is it at that point God comes in and resorts to His own rights in mercy?

J.T. Yes. In Exodus God is saying that He has taken account of what men of faith, as seen in Genesis, did toward Him; what they did in the way of offerings and worship. But in Exodus He is saying. All are to know that I have My own thoughts about these matters, and these must henceforth govern My service, hence the elaborate instructions of the typical books. In these the blood of the offerings is placed in a certain position. This entered into the service of the priesthood. In the early services in Exodus the blood of the sacrifices was put in vessels, as in chapters 12 and 24. This evidently implied a general principle. Thus when our Lord's precious blood was shed this principle would apply; heaven cared for it. The priestly instruction of the New Testament takes infinite care of it -- "precious blood ... the blood of Christ".

A.R. I always thought that Romans 3:25 linked on with Leviticus 16 -- the day of atonement.

J.T. It does link with it; it is the antitype of it. The blood was sprinkled upon the mercy-seat and seven times before the mercy-seat -- sprinkled on it and before it.

A.R. There could be no gospel preaching without the blood being sprinkled before God.

J.T. That is how the importance of the types comes in and how important it is to read them. We come to the mercy-seat here and it is in the resolution of this question of righteousness. So we have, "... for the shewing forth of his righteousness, in respect of the passing by the sins that had taken place before, through the forbearance of God", verse 25. These words are all to be noted carefully. "For the shewing forth of his righteousness in the present time, so that he should be just, and justify him that is of the faith of Jesus". There you have the 'of' again, showing faith is stressed, but the kind of faith, and how righteousness is linked with it. It says in the end of chapter 4, referring to the types, "Now it was not written on his account alone that it was reckoned to him, but on ours also, to whom, believing on him who has raised from among the dead Jesus our Lord, who has been delivered for our offences and has been raised for our justification, it will be reckoned", verse 23 - 25. Not only do we have the mercy-seat but the resurrection of Jesus. We must come to that for the resolution of righteousness. It is a question of imputation; that is, this kind of righteousness -- imputed righteousness. It is imputed to us, it says, at the end of verse 24; that is, by believing. The apostle is stressing that: "To whom, believing on him who has raised from among the dead Jesus our Lord, who has been delivered for our offences and has been raised for our justification, it will be reckoned".

A.R. Would you say a word about being raised for our justification?

J T It is to touch us, I think; as if wholly for us. Of course, it will be applied later to others, but it is for our justification.

D.P. Would it be right to say that every tenet of the truth that you have been speaking of should be held in the mind of the believer and carried forward?

J.T. Yes. Carrying forward the truth, as learned, is most important. How shall we ever learn this book if

we do not? It is cumulative. We have to come to that side here to get the word 'our'. It is a very precious thing to have it, too.

J.T.Jr. Do we not have to learn the constitution of the kingdom in that way?

J.T. That is a good word to bring in at this time. I suppose it applies to any kingdom, but here we are not alluding to what happened in the revolution in this country when a nation was born in a day. The kingdom is already established here. It is known and realised to be established. But its principles and moral bearing are being unfolded here. So that we will suppose that refugees from eastern Europe land in this country (as they once did, in hundreds of thousands) and seek citizenship. The officials would raise the question as to the constitution. If they are to be citizens here, they must be instructed in the constitution of this country. That is the idea in this epistle. Believers are obligated to become instructed in the kingdom of God -- the varied features of it.

A.B.P. Is that the setting in Exodus 19?

J.T. Yes. When Israel set themselves down before the mount they virtually said. We are here now to learn and obey, and God says, I am ready to teach you. And we know how much there is to be learned in that book.

J.A.P. Where does the law -- the ten commandments -- come in, in connection with the constitution?

J.T. They come in immediately. "But now without law righteousness of God is manifested". That is stated in Romans 3. You do not need the law for justification, but the chapter does not open up what the law is. We learn that later. But we do not need it for justification. The early part of the chapter, however, tells that the Jews had a great advantage in being entrusted with the oracles of God, and verse 20 says that, "by law is knowledge of sin". We shall need all this when we come to chapter 7. It will come up there in full; but we must

bear in mind that justification is without the law, as we have said.

A.B.P. Speaking practically, when we commit ourselves to fellowship and break bread, are we, in a sense, committing ourselves to covenant?

J.T. I think that is the way it worked out in the types. The people undertook to carry out what God would say. He made His proposals to them in the passage read in Exodus 19; what great advantages there would be for them: a kingdom of priests; a holy nation. But then they were brought to God; Jehovah says, 'I brought you to Myself'; but the mediator brings them out of the camp to meet God. He brought them out to meet with God; that is, as it were, officially. Here there was formal distance. But at first Jehovah says He had borne them on eagles' wings and brought them to Himself. That is another matter. But as brought to Him through the mediator there was awe and distance.

R.M. John says, "To him who loves us, and has washed us from our sins in his blood, and made us a kingdom, priests to his God and Father", (Revelation 1:5, 6).

J.T. That is another thing. He has made us a kingdom. It is not the kingdom there. We have also other expressions such as that. That is not what we are dealing with. That is not the kingdom of God. It is what we are. He has made us a kingdom. But there is a good deal in that that has to be learned. What do you say about it?

R.M. What you say helps me; we are the kingdom there.

J.T. "And made us a kingdom, priests to his God and Father". It is not a kingdom of priests. In chapter 5:10 you have 'kings'. The point in chapter 1 is that He has made us a kingdom, priests to His God. That would mean that we are able to deal with things on the principle of authority. This would enter into our care meetings.

J.S. Do the first four chapters of Romans clear the position so that we can be built up in the faith system?

J.T. The question of righteousness through faith is brought out in chapters 3 and 4, and then the consequences in the blessed possession of the Spirit. He recapitulates, you might say, in the beginning of the chapter. That word 'therefore' is to be noted. "Therefore having been justified". It is a settled matter. "Therefore having been justified on the principle of faith, we have peace towards God through our Lord Jesus Christ; by whom we have also access by faith into this favour in which we stand, and we boast in hope of the glory of God. And not only that, but we also boast in tribulations, knowing that tribulation works endurance; and endurance, experience; and experience, hope; and hope does not make ashamed, because the love of God is shed abroad in our hearts by the Holy Spirit which has been given to us", verses 1 - 5. That is where all the "Amens" will come in, in this subject. All the "Amens" to God's overtures will be through the Spirit. He will work in our hearts, so that we might celebrate, which is what they did in Exodus 15"Jehovah is a man of war; ... Thy right hand, Jehovah, is become glorious in power".

R.W.S. Is it right to say that obedience and righteousness are principles received into the soul by faith? Faith takes them on as light, but when it comes to the love of God it requires more than faith -- a divine Person.

J.T. Yes. The Holy Spirit. That is the greatest thing we can have before us. He is not greater than Christ, but as great. Abstractly, divine Persons are equal. The Lord received the authority above and the power is in the Spirit down here where it is needed.

A.R. The Holy Spirit operating in our hearts keeps them subject.

D.R. Is it the heart with the love of God shed abroad in it by the Holy Spirit that God speaks of in

Deuteronomy? "Oh that there were such a heart in them, that they would fear me, and keep all my commandments continually, that it might be well with them and with their sons for ever!" chapter 5:29.

J.T. Yes. He purposed such a heart for them, and He says in Ezekiel that He is going to give it to them. That is the thing here. The power is the Holy Spirit in it, the love of God shed abroad there by the Spirit. That is the kind of heart the Christian has. It implies new birth, as seen in John 3.

R.W.S. Is the love of God another item in the kingdom?

J.T. That is what is meant, involving joy in the Holy Spirit. It is what the believer needs in his heart to make him a real man according to God, in view of the assembly.

C.A.M. When it speaks of the love of God shed abroad in our hearts by the Holy Spirit, is it right to look at that as objective, or subjective, or both?

J.T. It is subjective; but what is stressed is what is in your heart. The Holy Spirit has put it there. It is a wonderful fact that God is so caring for us that He has deputed such a Person, as a Person in the Deity, to put that love in our hearts.

C.A.M. It is so marvellous that I asked the question on that account. The formation in the Christian at this stage seems hardly equal to the immensity of the thing.

J.T. God is giving us the greatest thing where it is needed, and it is needed that we speak of it thus in connection with the closing verses that we read -- the last two verses of this chapter. It requires the Spirit to touch our hearts so that we might apprehend the idea of the throne, that grace is on the throne; not the Spirit on the throne, but grace; not a person, but a thing, an element. That is worthy of consideration. We have come to the end of our subject for this time, but that is the idea in these two verses, that grace is on the throne.

C.A.M. If you find a person who does not have the

Spirit or any features of the Spirit, he has no peace with God in his soul.

J.T. He needs grace; he needs to understand that grace reigns. It is not judgment that is on the throne; it is not even mercy on the throne; it is grace. It is an element in God and in the saints too; but it is an element that the Holy Spirit operates in here that overcomes every possible difficulty in the exercised human mind and conscience.

A.N.W. Grace is allied with righteousness. Grace reigns through righteousness. That is wonderful!

E.McK. Is it peculiar to the Spirit's day?

J.T. It is. We are not dealing with the millennium. We are dealing with the present dispensation, and God would have us honour it and see how magnificent it is. Grace is on the throne; not righteousness. Righteousness is an accompanying thing, as just remarked. It makes it effective. Without it you could not have grace reigning.

Question. Would you say that this last verse is a reference to the kingdom of heaven as referred to in the gospels?

J.T. Well, we will come to that. The kingdom of heaven is a term proper to Matthew. It is a question of the rule of heaven. This is not just that. This is the rule of grace. We are not under law, but under grace. That is what this book tells us.

A.R. It does not speak about grace reigning in the millennium.

J.T. No; quite so.

T.M. Does grace bring about the propitiousness of the present moment?

J.T. Yes. That is a rich suggestion.

R.W.S. The abundance of these matters you mentioned -- the love of God shed abroad in our hearts, and then the over-abounding of grace -- is it not to indicate to us that these kingdom blessings are not rationed or limited for us?

J.T. That is right. I think we really learn the Christian outlook properly in Paul, and thus we are to follow Paul: "Paul and his company". We want that thought in our minds. We are not ignoring Peter nor the eleven, but the Spirit notes Paul and his company. That is. God has helped on to his line at this juncture in the testimony. This epistle contemplates all that preceded it through the twelve, but now Paul has taken the matter on, and we get completeness. He completes the word of God.

J.A.P. Does the Lord Jesus exemplify what you are saying as to the use of words? It says of Him, "And all bore witness to him, and wondered at the words of grace which were coming out of his mouth" (Luke 4:22).

J.T. Yes. It is not simply 'words', but "words of grace" That is the point there.

J.H.E. Would John help? "For the law was given by Moses: grace and truth subsists through Jesus Christ", (John 1:17).

J.T. Just so; grace by itself is what we need first. Truth, of course, is necessary. Truth is never said to be on the throne, nor mercy, nor righteousness. It is grace. One wonders how much it is understood.

R.W.S. Would you just distinguish between grace and mercy? I get a sense that I do not deserve mercy. I do not merit it, but still that would apply to grace too, would it not?

J.T. We have to distinguish between them. They are not synonyms. Mercy is sovereign. The idea of sovereign grace is hardly scriptural. Mercy is the word that should be used in dealing with sovereignty on these lines. "But according to his own mercy he saved us", (Titus 3:5.) "Saved by grace" is how the thing is done, but it is according to His mercy. That is. God acts sovereignly. You have no merits at all; you have no claims at all. Your conduct renders you utterly unfit for any clemency on God's part. Grace comes in there as operational. Grace can take you up, whatever your

conduct has been. Grace can take you up and bring you into the divine thought. Grace is operational; mercy is hardly that. Grace can work notwithstanding the worst conduct or conditions that anyone can have. So with Paul; he was an insolent overbearing man, but mercy was shown him and in due course grace became operational in his case. It is a longer story. Grace involves a longer story and, therefore, it is largely the theme of the gospel.

A.R. Are the acts of the good Samaritan grace?

J.T. I would think so. That is on the service side; and he had what was needed.

A.R. He came to where he was.

J.T. Just so; he had what was needed to meet his case.

A.B.P. Does it not say, "He that shewed him mercy", Luke 10:37?

J.T. Well, that must be there as the motive underlying the action. That is an element that must be there in the operations of grace.

D.R. The Scripture says, "... who before was a blasphemer and persecutor, and an insolent overbearing man: but mercy was shewn me because I did it ignorantly, in unbelief. But the grace of our Lord surpassingly over-abounded with faith and love, which is in Christ Jesus", (1 Timothy 1:13, 14).

J.T. That helps us greatly.

C.A.M. Would it be right to say that one principal thought in relation to mercy is the terrible condition of need, and grace emphasises the gloriousness and blessing in view of which it will operate?

J.T. Yes. It is a slower process. Grace undertakes to do what mercy proposes -- in spite of the adverse conditions.

R.D.G. Was it not really grace in which David moved when he said, "Is there yet any that is left of the house of Saul, that I may shew him kindness for Jonathan's sake?" (2 Samuel 9:1).

J.T. Quite so. Grace effected all.

A.N.W. Mercy seems to be linked with a seat; there is a mercy-seat, but grace seems to have a throne in mind. Grace reigns.

J.T. Yes. The throne lends authority.

E.McK. Do the operations come out in Luke 4, "The Spirit of the Lord is upon me", verse 18?

J.T. Yes. It shows how the anointed One would work. Grace involves application -- how need is met. Mercy is behind it. The anointing represents grace. It is the operational side that has to be borne in mind. The gospels are full of it -- how the thing was done; in spite of adverse conditions the need is met.

J.H.E. Paul sums his case up: "But by God's grace I am what I am", (1 Corinthians 15:10).

J.T. That shows what we are saying, that grace is the operational side

THE KINGDOM OF GOD (2)

Romans 6:14 - 18; Romans 7:1 - 9, 22 - 25; Romans 8:1 - 11

J.T. In considering our subject last time we ended with chapter 5 of this book. It was remarked that the principles of the kingdom then under review related to sins; this time the subject of sin, a root principle, is before us. At the close of our last reading we were particularly occupied with the reign of grace. "So also grace might reign through righteousness to eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord", chapter 5: 21. The use of the word 'reign' was noted; authority is the principle of reigning. And now our first verse today, chapter 6:14, says, "For sin shall not have dominion over you, for ye are not under law but under grace". So that we are taught negatively here; that is, what does not have dominion over us; what does not reign over us.

A.A.T. Where does the kingdom of God fit into this?

J.T. Well, it is used negatively; sin has no authority over us; it "shall not have dominion over you, for ye are not under law but under grace". The later scriptures read will deal with the subject in that sense -- that we are set free, having power in the Spirit. The negative and the positive agree in that sense. In chapter 8 we shall thus see how deliverance from the dominion of sin is worked out.

A.N.W. "Alive to God in Christ Jesus", suggests the supremacy of God on the positive side.

A.P.T. Do I understand you to say that sin is a principle operating?

J.T. Just so -- a root principle.

A.P.T. Perhaps you would help us to see it more clearly.

J.T. Well, it is seen earlier in the chapter. Verse 1 says, "What then shall we say? Should we continue in sin that grace may abound? Far be the thought. We

who have died to sin, how shall we still live in it?" All this relates to baptism. So it goes on: "Are you ignorant that we, as many as have been baptised unto Christ Jesus, have been baptised unto his death? We have been buried therefore with him by baptism unto death, in order that, even as Christ has been raised up from among the dead by the glory of the Father, so we also should walk in newness of life. For if we are become identified with him in the likeness of his death, so also we shall be of his resurrection; knowing this, that our old man has been crucified with him, that the body of sin might be annulled, that we should no longer serve sin. For he that has died is justified from sin", verses 1 - 7. I think the matter is clearly laid down there, baptism coming into view. The believer is not regarded as a Christian until he is baptised. "He that believes and is baptised shall be saved", (Mark 16:16) -- not shall be, or has been, but is baptised; that is, he is actually baptised, and he is on the basis therefore of salvation. But here the salvation involves "from sin".

C.A.M. The fact that he uses the words "our old man", in verse 6, and the idea of "the body of sin" would confirm what you said as to sin being a principle, it is bigger than any man, is it not?

J.T. Yes: it is bigger, involving our old man, the operations being in the old man; our old man is crucified with Christ. There is only one; it is a great moral thought, including all men.

A.R. It would involve freedom from the body; we are free from this body, which we are carrying about with us all the time.

J.T. Yes, "the body of sin": "So also ye, reckon yourselves dead to sin and alive to God in Christ Jesus. Let not sin therefore reign in your mortal body to obey its lusts. Neither yield your members instruments of unrighteousness to sin, but yield yourselves to God as alive from among the dead, and your members instruments of

righteousness to God". The body of sin is regarded as annulled; the body of it would be the totality of it; that is, the root principle that is before us -- how it is dealt with and how thus we can be dear in our bodies of it. We are not to let it reign in our mortal bodies, but "yield yourselves to God as alive from among the dead, and your members instruments of righteousness to God".

J.T.Jr. Does that put the responsibility on us? "Let not sin therefore reign in your mortal body", and, "Neither yield your members instruments of unrighteousness to sin". It is our responsibility, is it not? In verse 14 it is something else, that sin shall not have dominion over you.

J.T. That is how the truth stands, so that the believer's body is cleared. These are the basic facts by which we come into the truth in chapter 7, and into liberty; the Spirit supporting all this in our souls.

A.R. Is this what is going on inside of us; the battle is inside?

J.T. We shall see that more fully in chapter 7.

A.N.W. Is not the principle more outside? Would not the idea be seen perhaps in the control that Pharaoh had; I disown that authority and yield myself to God?

J.T. Yes. Sin in chapter 6 is objective; that is, something that we have to contend with externally. We are to reckon ourselves dead to it. It is not sin in us, but a system to which we regard ourselves dead.

W.F.K. Is the thought that we should be "translated ... into the kingdom of the Son of his love", Colossians 1:13?

J.T. Well that comes into our subject and will, God willing be considered later on. Now we are dealing with the principles of the kingdom. The kingdom of the Son of God's love is a Colossian idea, but this epistle precedes that.

C.A.M. Would you say that this chapter of Romans is more on the line of doctrine, the next chapter being more experience? I allude to your statement about the idea of

sin in this chapter being objective. Is there not a certain line of things where a doctrine presented to us brings a freedom of soul?

J.T. Quite so; that is alluded to in verse 17: "But thanks be to God, that ye were bondmen of sin, but have obeyed from the heart the form of teaching into which ye were instructed". Notice, it is not exactly divine Persons here yet; it is the teaching, involving the principles of the kingdom. Defect lies with most of us in the absence of these. It is quite right to speak of a Person controlling you, and many such thoughts, but the doctrine is intended to affect our minds and stay with us all the time, as you might say; a constitutional thing by which we are automatically controlled as we understand it and are subject to it.

F.S.C. Is baptism to be held in our minds in the reckoning?

J.T. Quite so; the thing has happened, the believer "is baptised". "He that believes and is baptised shall be saved". The thing is there to affect you, and then the consequences. The teaching includes the idea of baptism, so that we become constitutionally automatic in dealing with these matters; there are negative principles and there are positive principles. The great negative principle is in verse 14: "For sin shall not have dominion over you". That does not mean that it will not if it has opportunity. "Shall not" means that you are authoritative in the thing. You say. It must not be; that principle does not apply now. That is the idea.

W.W.M. Is that the reason why the word "reckon" is used here? It says, "Reckon yourselves ... alive to God in Christ Jesus". You keep that in your mind?

J.T. That is it. So that when the thing comes up, you are ready for it any time. You have the thing in your mind. This epistle is intended to affect us constitutionally so that the truth taught becomes automatic.

A.P.T. The expression, "Far be the thought" is used

in verse 2, and again in verse 15. Does that confirm what you are stressing, that our minds are always ready to refuse any principle operating against the truth?

J.T. Yes. Let it be far away from you; it is foreign to you; hence, when you are tempted, the temptation is foreign, a foreign element.

J.S. You cannot go back into Egypt, in that sense.

J.T. Just so, you are out of it. You are in the wilderness where you are governed by other things. When we come to Sinai we are governed by the code involving the service of God, but we have hardly come to that yet; although in chapter 7 it is said that we should "serve in newness of spirit, and not in oldness of letter", verse 6. That involves Sinai. Chapter 7 really involves Sinai, but this chapter is more the lusts ministered to in Egypt.

W.R. Would it imply the co-ordination of the faculties to refuse sin in the world, and to accept what is positive as of God?

J.T. Quite so; so that you come "over the border". When you come over the Canadian border you are no longer under Canadian rule. A Canadian law may be as good as an American law, but sin is absolutely bad, and righteousness is absolutely good. It is a question of sin and righteousness, and sin has no dominion over the believer. "Shall not" means you have authority yourself against it.

A.N.W. And while it is a mental process, the obeying is from your heart. Your heart is involved -- "obeyed from the heart", verse 17.

J.T. That would mean that your affections go out to God, answering to the kingdom of God. Affection has play, and works up to the King Himself, for the "love of God is shed abroad in our hearts", chapter 5: 5. We get here, "Ye ... have obeyed from the heart the form of teaching into which ye were instructed", verse 17.

T.E.H. Two freedoms follow: the first freedom you

come into is that you become bondmen of righteousness, and the second is that you become bondmen to God.

J.T. Yes. "But now, having got your freedom from sin, and having become bondmen to God, ye have your fruit unto holiness, and the end eternal life", verse 22. What you come into is wonderful. The possibility is wonderful, everlasting life is involved in it. That is really all we have time to look into in chapter 6. It is a question of how we come into the kingdom by teaching, by the principles of the kingdom: that we arrive at bondmanship to God; also arrive at eternal life. These thoughts are just touched. And then chapter 7 comes into its place, in which the Sinaitic principles are seen as bearing on the subject before us. The point made early in the chapter is the death of the first husband. "Are ye ignorant, brethren" -- now we are supposed to know law. "Are ye ignorant, brethren (for I speak to those knowing law,) that law rules over a man as long as he lives?" Anyone can see this is a question of principle that we are to be governed by; the matter of a man's death and what it means: "For the married woman is bound by law to her husband so long as he is alive; but if the husband should die, she is clear from the law of the husband: so then, the husband being alive, she shall be called an adulteress if she be to another man; but if the husband should die, she is free from the law, so as not to be an adulteress, though she be to another man. So that, my brethren, ye also have been made dead to the law by the body of the Christ, to be to another, who has been raised up from among the dead, in order that we might bear fruit to God", verses 2 - 4. So we are distinctly progressing here in this matter of deliverance from the first husband.

A.R. Is that why Moses' wife called him a "bloody husband"?

J.T. Yes. It is implied as anti-typical of the Lord Jesus, as enforcing circumcision-He is thus a bloody

Husband to us. We have to include that in our instruction, but there are things in Romans, which you just touch and leave. You do not bring in the whole matter because one word is used. Therefore, the Lord has to be regarded as having His rights now, that we are to be to another, that is, to our Moses. Circumcision is fully seen in Colossians as applied to us.

W.W.M. Would you say a word about being made dead to the law by the body of Christ? How does that operate?

J.T. "So that, my brethren, ye also have been made dead to the law by the body of the Christ, to be to another". That is, the truth of Christ's death has acted on you; how the law as to the death of a husband bears in that way -- an illustration of the Spirit's way of using Scripture. The woman is free because her husband is dead; she comes to know that it is so. But it is transferred now to the body of Christ; that the dead man by whom we become delivered from the law is Christ, as having died.

R.W.S. Is your first point that the kingdom resolves the principle of sin, and now the principle of the law is resolved? The one is evil, but is the law right? Chapter 7 says that law rules over a man as long as he lives.

J.T. We shall see how it works out. We are told that the law is holy and just and good. It has authority, but we are absolved from it through the death of the first husband. The first husband was really the legal system at Jerusalem, for the early Christians; they were relieved from that obligation so as to serve in newness of spirit. But that was the knowledge of Christ having died but now alive. I think we have to carry the idea of Christianity in our minds to see how it works out; how it was in the early days amongst Jewish Christians; how they became intelligent in what they were doing by the knowledge of Christ having died, risen again and having gone into

heaven. Thus the saints were free to enter on the service of God, which was initially inaugurated in Jerusalem.

A.R. Is it like the youths in Exodus 24 offering up the bullocks?

J.T. That is right; they served as priests; for the moment they were the priests. The system, in principle, was set up there, plenty of blood being applied. But we are now dealing with the death of the first husband -- how this is effected in "the body of the Christ ... who has been raised up from among the dead, in order that we might bear fruit to God". The law has been ended for us in Christ's death and resurrection, so that we should bear fruit to God, and serve Him in newness of spirit. Affection comes in powerfully in the service: we "serve in newness of spirit, and not in oldness of letter". The question of affection comes in now in the new husband; that is how the Jewish Christians came into it; the teaching of the twelve apostles would enlarge their minds as to the whole matter of Sinai, how they were absolved from it in the risen Man -- Christ now in heaven.

J.T.Jr. Would you say Peter and John in John 20 were really clear in their minds as to the resurrection? It says they believed and went home, but Mary's mixed condition would allude to what might go on in us for a long time. She wanted to find the Lord where He had been laid; she thought they had taken Him away. She did not arrive at the new Husband in this sense that He was living.

J.T. Just so, but Peter and John had gone home, however; they did not find the service of God there; nor did Mary immediately find it, but she was on the way to it when she said, Rabboni; it showed she had gained from the teaching, and had gained in her heart too, and therefore the Lord takes her up and the whole matter became opened up now. But Romans does not lead us into the service of God fully. The apostle touches the

the principle of it, but moves on to something else, so that we should be generally founded as to the kingdom. John 20 goes further than Romans.

W.W.M. Would something of what we have here now enter into the mind of the Ethiopian eunuch when Philip preached to him Jesus, and he wanted to be baptised; he wanted to be identified with the Lord's death?

J.T. "His life is taken from the earth", (Acts 8:33); that is the word there, quoted from Isaiah 53. Well, where is He? The Spirit shows you immediately that you can go to Him quickly; that is, Philip is raptured. Jethro says to his daughters. Where is he? They had left him outside. Exodus 2. The idea of rapture lies in the Spirit. In Acts 8 we are coming to the new order of things in Cornelius and the rapture of Philip is a suggestion of Christianity -- what we come into. We get in chapter 10 the thought of ecstasy. We have to learn these thoughts to come into Christianity, but, as we have said, Romans is generally foundational.

A.R. In chapter 7 it is "serve in newness of spirit", not the full thought; is that the idea?

J.T. Yes; "not in oldness of letter". If you were in Jerusalem in those days you would see how the letter was killing people; they were refusing Christ and dying morally, whereas the believers were coming into life, living to God in the Spirit.

D.P. When a difficulty arises these principles of which you are speaking begin to work in the believer automatically?

J.T. They do, so that when we come together to break bread we do not have to open the Bible for everything; I mean to say, when we come to the service of God, we have things in our minds. "I speak as to intelligent persons", the apostle says. Some of us are not intelligent. We therefore need to see how others act -- there are some intelligent persons; we want to see what they do, always

bearing in mind that the Lord gives understanding in all things.

A.A.T. It says, "... in order that we might bear fruit to God", chapter 7:4. Does that relate to the service?

J.T. I think it is more general. We are to bear fruit in every good work. It is to be worked out later on. In this epistle things are touched and the Spirit moves on to something else; because Romans is especially the foundational epistle and there is a great deal of ground to cover. Thus we get basic truth into our souls, and therefore when you reach a kingdom man you have a man that can tell you something. We want to be kingdom men first; then assembly men, and then heavenly men. Of course, every feature of the truth is normally developed in its relation to the others.

F.H.L. Did you say the legal system was dead in the death of Christ for the Jewish believers?

J.T. Yes; and so the Lord's Supper was affected. In it Christ is Husband to the saints instead of the law. Paul doctrinised it. He said that he received it from the Lord; he got it doctrinally more than the twelve did. In the first letter to the Corinthians, he tells us, "For I received from the Lord, that which I also delivered to you, that the Lord Jesus, in the night in which he was delivered up, took bread, and having given thanks broke it, and said. This is my body, which is for you: this do in remembrance of me. In like manner also the cup, after having supped, saying. This cup is the new covenant in my blood: this do, as often as ye shall drink it, in remembrance of me", chapter 11:23 - 25. Compared with the gospels, the wording in 1 Corinthians is much reduced.

R.W.S. What you say helps, because when you go back in the light of Christianity the matter of the body of Christ is a marital thought.

J.T. Yes, but not developed. So that in reading Romans we must not bring everything into it, but go on

to other features. Of course, we may refer to Colossians and Ephesians, as occasion may require, to complete any subject.

A.N.W. "To be to another", and then to "bear fruit to God": we might go on to speak of the Lord's supper and the service of God, but what is said in verse 2 is just enough for the purpose in mind.

C.A.M. Touching on it in that way serves its purpose; it takes the believer out of himself, do you not think? It is very comforting and assuring that the immense thing involved in the verse is outside ourselves.

J.T. Quite so; deliverance from the law. The word deliverance had a great place fifty years ago. The brethren got hold of it, I believe. Mr. Raven was used largely to give the idea. Deliverance was a thing by itself, but it is not so much used now. I think we prefer to deal with it progressively, so that death comes in at the end of our chapter. We have already had the thought of "dead to the law by the body of the Christ, to be to another, who has been raised up from among the dead". The marital thought in the Lord's supper is suggested there, leading up to the service of God. But it would not do to bring it all in there. We touch on it, and then we go on to the inward condition we are in; how the law worked, as in Paul, "when we were in the flesh". Ultimately he says, "O wretched man that I am! who shall deliver me out of this body of death?" It is "this body of death" now; it is not the law, nor the first husband, nor the "body of the Christ", it is this body of death. And then he thanks God. "I thank God, through Jesus Christ our Lord"; so we learn to give thanks. It is in this sense that we come really into deliverance. We learn to give thanks to God for what we have come to thus far. The Spirit is essential to this, and hence the victorious eighth chapter following.

A.B.P. What is the distinction between the body of sin and the body of death?

J.T. This body of death is in verse 24: "O wretched man that I am! who shall deliver me out of this body of death?" The body of sin is in verse 6 of chapter 6: "Our old man has been crucified with him, that the body of sin might be annulled". There it is the great general thought of sin viewed as a system. There is only one old man. Each one of us is not viewed in that way. The old man is sinful, and we are crucified with Christ as of it, "that the body of sin might be annulled". That is the totality of sin. "The body of sin" is the totality of it. It is not the idea of a person, but the body of sin.

A.B.P. And then "this body of death": do these references to the body suggest that the thing is worked out in our bodies?

J.T. That is the idea.

A.N.W. In verse 6 it is collective, whereas the verse you are dealing with now in chapter 7 is individual.

J.T. That is right; each one of us in his own body has experienced the thing, but chapter 6 is a general thought of sin viewed as a system. Our old man has been crucified with Him that the body of sin might be annulled.

A.B.P. Therefore it is the working of this thing in my body culminating in death. Chapter 7 is an experimental advance on chapter 6?

J.T. Yes. You experience the bondage attached to it, how the truth has worked in you. It has occasioned a state of darkness and death in your soul, and it is a necessary thing that it should be so, that you might judge the whole sinful state thoroughly. The subject begins in verse 5 of chapter 7. "For when we were in the flesh the passions of sins, which were by the law, wrought in our members to bring forth fruit to death; but now we are clear from the law, having died in that in which we were held, so that we should serve in newness of spirit, and not in oldness of letter. What shall we say then?" verses 5 - 7. Now this brings us to the real crux of the matter.

What shall we say? "Is the law sin? Far be the thought". The exercise that has now to be gone through implies that the knowledge entering into it has really become a trouble to me for the moment; until the exercise is completed, I am suffering. And we all have to learn as Abraham. A horror of great darkness came over him. We have got to go through the experience. And then the wail in verse 24, "O wretched man that I am! who shall deliver me out of this body of death?" And then the thanksgiving, which is itself part of the deliverance. You did not know the blessing was so near, but it breaks in on you, and the Spirit of God comes to your aid in it, so there is a decision reached in your soul. "I thank God, through Jesus Christ our Lord. So then I myself with the mind serve God's law; but with the flesh sin's law". That is, the believer with his mind acts authoritatively, and this makes room for the Spirit who is seen operating in chapter 8. "The law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus has set me free from the law of sin and of death".

F.S.C. Would you bring in the man that was all leprous and became clean?

J.T. That would be a sort of type of it. The Lord had to touch him. "I will; be thou cleansed". Is that your thought?

F.S.C. I was thinking about Leviticus and the one who was leprous all over.

J.T. You get concrete examples worked out in the Lord's own personal ministry in the gospels. The cleansed leper is suggestive. He was made clean at once. The Lord had to touch him to do that, showing that He went through the thing, Luke 5:13. He identified Himself with the leper.

T.E.H. When I begin to give thanks in the way in which this chapter ends, would there be an indication that the Spirit's gracious work has had its way in my soul?

J.T. Yes. Light has had its way in your soul

gradually, and at the darkest moment it breaks through in volume, so you begin to give thanks instead of being worried and troubled, and that introduces you into the glorious facts depicted in chapter 8, that is where the Spirit has scope instead of the flesh.

A.R. Genesis 15 is very important instruction. Before the sun had gone down Abram got an indication about the 400 years ahead.

J.T. Yes. That 400 years had to be gone through by Israel, but Abram went through the horror immediately.

A.P.T. Is chapter 6 more objective knowledge and chapter 7 more conscious knowledge -- what you learn in yourself?

J.T. I would say that; experimental knowledge, but involving great inward suffering. The state in your soul becomes almost intolerable, but light breaks through. And then you begin to give thanks instead of groaning.

J.H.H. I was wondering whether Jonah would be a type of it? "The bars of the earth closed upon me for ever: but thou hast brought up my life from the pit, O Jehovah my God", chapter 2:6. It breaks in suddenly.

J.T. I do not know whether we could visualise what it was to be in the belly of that fish. What an awful thing it must have been! But in chapter 2, what a change! The fish vomits him out on dry land. You can understand the change in the man's mind; to look around and see and feel solid earth. He anticipated his deliverance in the fish's belly as we see in chapter 2; he would sacrifice unto Jehovah with the voice of thanksgiving and pay his vows.

A.P.T. Jonah said, "But thou hast brought up my life from the pit, O Jehovah my God. When my soul fainted within me, I remembered Jehovah; and my prayer came in unto thee, into thy holy temple. They that observe lying vanities forsake their own mercy. But I will sacrifice unto thee with the voice of thanksgiving; I will pay that which I have vowed. Salvation is

of Jehovah. And Jehovah commanded the fish, and it vomited out Jonah upon the dry land". That is beautiful. ..

T.E.H. Mr. Raven alluded to this matter, saying that it is like coming through a long dark tunnel and discovering at the bend a burst of light.

J.T. Yes, indeed; would that it might take place in our souls! Most of us know very little in our souls of this burst of light; it changes our outlook and feeling.

A.B.P. Did Ananias help Saul into it?

J.T. I think he did. He says. Brother Saul, and also, Saul brother. That must have been light to his soul. But then there was a good deal following on that in his soul experience.

A.B.P. I wondered if through those three days and three nights of darkness, being shut up to himself, he may have reached this point where he cried out, and then the light came in. His eyes were opened and he got the light of what the Lord had in mind for him.

J.T. He tells us about himself later. Ananias had said to him, "And now why lingerest thou? Arise and get baptised, and have thy sins washed away, calling on his name", (Acts 22:16). His sins must have been a burden to him; showing he needed the teaching of baptism.

A.P.T. "I thank God", (Romans 7:25). We do not want to leave Him out, do we?

J.T. No; "I thank God, through Jesus Christ our Lord". That leads us to chapter 8, as already said. "There is then now no condemnation to those in Christ Jesus. For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus has set me free from the law of sin and of death. For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh. God, having sent his own Son, in likeness of flesh of sin, and for sin, has condemned sin in the flesh, in order that the righteous requirement of the law should be fulfilled in us, who do not walk according to flesh but

according to Spirit", verses 1 - 5. Now the matter of sin in the flesh is settled; it is dealt with; it is condemned.

W.F.K. Would you bring in Numbers 21 -- the totality of the flesh dealt with?

J.T. Yes, in the serpent of brass, and in the springing well; that is a type of what we are considering in chapter 8.

A.R. The idea of not being condemned as in Christ Jesus is very comforting. Would you say a little about that? "There is then now no condemnation to those in Christ Jesus".

J.T. We must not go too far in the truth of "in Christ Jesus", although it is in the chapter; it is worked out in Colossians and Ephesians. It is brought in here to show the grandness of the position we are brought into. It is in Christ Jesus; it is the new status that we have; that God has brought us into.

W.R. Would the close of chapter 7 be power working internally in the believer, and would the features of chapter 8 be seen externally, in our ways and walk, as in the good of deliverance?

J.T. Yes. Chapter 8 begins with "the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus". Notice it is "those in Christ Jesus" in verse 1; it is status, it is our position. But then the operative power is the Spirit of life. It is a new order of things, but it is not fully developed in this chapter. We need Colossians or Ephesians for this: the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus -- not only "the power of his life", in chapter 5. There is a "law" attached to the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus, also liberating power.

J.A.P. Is this the answer to verse 14 of chapter 6: "Sin shall not have dominion over you"?

J.T. Just so; you are liberated now; you have left the question of sin far behind; that is far behind you now; sin's dominion over you is foreign to you now. That is the way it is worked out experimentally, and you come into a new order of things where there is another law, a

new law -- the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus. Notice the "in Christ Jesus"; the law is there, and I am conscious of its workings. It brings out the greatness of the new order of things, although it is not developed fully. The Spirit is much mentioned but the system involved awaits Colossians and Ephesians because the assembly is not yet brought into it.

D.P. In passing through the exercise of Romans 7, are not certain marks left on the believer that can be identified?

J.T. That he is that kind of a man, you mean? Abraham corresponds. The "horror of great darkness", of which we have spoken, would leave a distinctive effect. He would never forget that experience and it would leave a mark on him. In most of us the experience of Romans 7 is shallow and extended, but it is essential to reality and spiritual fibre. God in faithfulness to us places us in circumstances in which the reality of the bondage of the law through sin is forced upon us. This leads us to the wretchedness of which verse 24 speaks. The liberating light of the gospel affords the relief expressed in the thanksgiving of verse 25, and the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus establishes us in this.

T.E.H. Would you help me as to the vicarious burial of Jesus? Would that in any way help me to understand this matter of the new man coming out?

J.T. There is an exercise connected with it. The Lord, I need not say, did not need the experience of the three days and three nights. It is for us, and baptism leads us into it. We are baptised unto Christ's death, (Romans 6:4); but Romans does not say we are raised with Him, only we shall be. Colossians, however, says, "... buried with him in baptism, in which ye have been also raised with him through faith of the working of God", chapter 2:12. We must therefore go to Colossians for the complete thought of death and resurrection with Christ including the three days in the grave. The Lord said to

the thief, "To-day shalt thou be with me in paradise", (Luke 23:43). But that was in a disembodied condition, and did not include the Lord's resurrection.

A.N.W. I think the remark about the three days illuminates the lengthy period of the forty days; I think that is a fact to be well noted.

J.T. The experiences that are spoken of in Scripture in their length and variety are remarkable; as, for instance, the periods of uncleanness required in Leviticus 12 at the birth of children, and the uncleanness occasioned by certain contacts mentioned in Numbers 19. These are all intended to affect us and help us in our experiences.

A.B.P. In the opening of Romans 7 it says, "Law rules over a man as long as he lives. For the married woman is bound by law to her husband so long as he is alive" -- might that link on with the period of exercise we go through in apprehending the meaning of the holding power of death suggested in the three days and three nights in which the Lord was in the grave?

J.T. Yes; no doubt it would especially be understood by the early Christians out of Judaism. Coming into the truth of Romans would affect them in this way. The Lord had showed Himself to them at certain times, and these appearances involved increased liberation for them. The domination of the first husband, the law, would be felt earlier to some extent.

A.B.P. It would seem a considerable time to Abigail after she had seen David until Nabal died.

A.P.T. In this section there are interesting links bearing on all this: "... even as Christ has been raised up from among the dead", chapter 6:4; "Christ having been raised up from among the dead dies no more", chapter 6: 9; "Christ ... who has been raised up from among the dead, in order that we might bear fruit to God", chapter 7:4; "But if the Spirit of him that has raised up Jesus from among the dead dwell in you, he that has raised up Christ from among the dead shall quicken your mortal

bodies also on account of his Spirit which dwells in you", chapter 8: 11.

F.S.C. What is the difference between "raised up from among the dead" and the statement in chapter 1, "resurrection of the dead"?

J.T. By the resurrection of the dead the Lord is declared to be Son of God in power. But raised up from among the dead is an additional thing that He has come up from among the dead, having left them behind. The word up is to be applied as the New Translation shows.

A.N.W. Here it is a matter of favour -- raised from the dead by the glory of the Father; an act of power, of course, but also an act of pleasure.

A.Pf. The Lord says, "Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up", (John 2:19).

J.T. That specially brings out His deity. The Father did it here -- Romans 6:4. But the Lord raised Himself, which is a great thought as to His Person. He can and will raise all the dead, but He raised Himself.

THE KINGDOM OF GOD (3)

Romans 12:1 - 3; Romans 13:1 - 5; Romans 14:1 - 18

J.T. At our last reading we were engaged with chapter 6 of Romans, the truth based on baptism; and then chapter 7 dealing with deliverance from the law, making way for the service of God; and then in chapter 8 the principles there accompanying the truth of the Holy Spirit, righteousness being fulfilled in the saints as walking not after the flesh but after the Spirit. The succeeding three chapters, as is well known, have the character of a parenthesis and hardly bear on our subject. They refer to the reconciliation of God's ways with Israel culminating in the gospel extending to the nations and the ultimate restoration in blessing of His ancient people. Now it is thought that we might complete the consideration of our subject in so far as it enters into Romans, touching on the hortatory part of the epistle; first as to the believer's body and what hinges on it in relation to the kingdom; and then the authorities in chapter 13; and finally, chapter 14, kingdom principles as applied to the weak brother. It is only in this fourteenth chapter, as we have seen, that the kingdom of God is formally mentioned in this epistle. It is not meat and drink but righteousness, and peace, and joy in the Holy Spirit, the negative statement there being an allusion to what might stumble a weak brother. We can well afford to deny ourselves of anything that would be of that character seeing that we are well off in the possession of the Spirit in the kingdom as making up for any self-denial. The subject of the believer's body, therefore, should come first in our inquiry, and obviously it is a very important one, especially as so much physical demand is now made on the believer; governments claiming it even to the use of the blood that the believer may be able to give for the relief of others.

A.P.T. Would it link on with the prophetic reference: "Thou hast prepared me a body", (Hebrews 10:5)?

J.T. It would. The truth governing our bodies must stand in relation to the Lord's body. It was especially prepared but, nevertheless, in it is seen the standard for us for we are enjoined to walk even as He walked, which involves much as to our bodies. Almost everything we do involves our bodies. In our chapter the first divine claim is to present them to God, which would be following on what the Lord did. In becoming Man He devoted Himself to God in the body prepared; devoted Himself even unto death.

A.A.T. In the Lord's supper the loaf speaks of His body, does it not?

J.T. Quite so. We had that on the last occasion, that we "have been made dead to the law by the body of the Christ, to be to another, who has been raised up from among the dead, in order that we might bear fruit to God", (Romans 7:4). That enters into what we have in chapter 12.

A.B.P. After the angel finished speaking to Mary, Luke 1, she said, "Behold the bondmaid of the Lord; be it to me according to thy word", verse 38. Would that be an example of one who is presenting her body?

J.T. Yes, and for the most exalted purpose. She was blessed among women. Her body was kept guarded infinitely by God during the time of His operation in the holy conception and birth of the Lord Jesus: "The Holy Spirit shall come upon thee, and power of the Highest overshadow thee, wherefore the holy thing also which shall be born shall be called Son of God", verse 35.

W.F.K. Must there be a work of God in a body before it is presented? It says, "... present your bodies ... holy".

J.T. It is to the believers in Rome that this exhortation is given: "I beseech you therefore, brethren",

(they are brethren; the subjects of the work of God in Rome) "by the compassions of God, to present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable to God, which is your intelligent service", chapter 12:1. It is obvious that there must be a work of God there.

H.G.H. Does the "intelligent service" have reference to our place in relation to the kingdom?

J.T. The kingdom, as we have been looking at it, and as it is seen here, is in relation to our pathway down here, only involving a system, which the kingdom implies. The kingdom of God is a moral thought; not yet the kingdom of the heavens, but the kingdom of God, which ought to be connected with the Holy Spirit down here. The kingdom of the heavens, as we hope to see on later occasions, is connected with Christ in heaven; so that the working out of the kingdom in the individual, in his body, is seen here leading up to the thought of the one body. It is said in verse 4, "For, as in one body we have many members, but all the members have not the same office; thus we, being many, are one body in Christ, and each one members one of the other", verses 4,5. The individual walk of the Christian is in mind, but it is a question whether there is any such walk except in the sense of the Christian being identified with the idea of a system, whether it be the kingdom of God or the body of Christ. I mean to say, we cannot be regarded as so many unattached units. The believer is morally attached.

A.R. Is that the idea of the "intelligent service"?

J.T. That is the idea. The same kind of expression is used in Corinthians in regard of the Lord's supper. "I speak as to intelligent persons: do ye judge what I say", (1 Corinthians 10:15). This is the same idea only it is the body in relation to the kingdom; but the same words are used in verse 4 as we get in 1 Corinthians 10, as we already read: "For, as in one body we have many members, but all the members have not the same office; thus we, being many, are one body in Christ, and each one members one

of the other". It is one body in Christ. It is not exactly one body as in Colossians and Ephesians; it is just the initial idea, which is peculiar to this book. Initial ideas are left so as to be used later; but 'one body in Christ' lifts us out of the idea of the 'friendly societies', so called, which would not be in Christ. Christians are a body just as the Freemasons would call themselves a body, only Christians are 'one body in Christ' and formation and intelligence necessarily enter into that. Hence, we cannot be regarded as unattached units. We are attached, in Christ, both in the kingdom and in the body.

A.N.W. Would baptism not imply that as to the kingdom?

J.T. Exactly. It is in relation to the kingdom. Christians are baptised, not in batches, but severally. The Ethiopian eunuch said, "Behold water; what hinders my being baptised?" (Acts 8:36). Philip went down with him into the water and that would link him on with the evangelist.

A.R. Would it be right to say the kingdom regulates the service of God?

J.T. Well, we have the idea of the service of God in chapter 7 of our epistle, but I do not think we should connect it exactly with the kingdom. Of course, the kingdom is the widest collective thought, but the service of God implies priesthood; that is, the minister of the sanctuary. This epistle really only gives us initial ideas and then we move on to something else. If we are intelligent we shall do so -- move on to something else, because the subject is wide and we cannot treat any of the subjects in this epistle fully. But we have the basic thought; we can build on it.

R.R.T. It says, "... to present your bodies a living sacrifice": would the thought be in the living sacrifice -- that it is to be a continuous matter with us?

J.T. Just so. God made man living. He breathed

into man's nostrils and man became a living soul; now we are made to live through the gospel, by the Spirit. According to chapters 5 and 6 we are made to live "The end eternal life", chapter 6:22, means that we live for ever, which is a great and blessed thought.

A.A.T. Why is the apostle bringing in the compassions of God just at this point?

J.T. To affect us. He is beseeching. That is. God condescends to come down to beseech us. God is graciously considering us and would influence us by the compassions, which according to the early part of the epistle He has shown. We have the idea of beseeching by things. Paul says, "Daily I die, by your boasting which I have in Christ Jesus our Lord", (1 Corinthians 15:31). The idea is of God appealing to us.

R.R.T. Is it not an appeal, too, in the way that it is put here? "Present your bodies" -- as though the Spirit of God, in the apostle, would recognise that we have that which may be considered as our own, and it is a question now as to what we will do with it, whether we will present it or not.

J.T. Just so. I think the individual side is somewhat stressed in the collective singular, as in (John 14:1): "Let not your heart" -- not your hearts. Here each one presents his body. Although the word service is employed, the thought here is hardly on the level of the service in the sanctuary. There is an allusion in Hebrews 13:15 to what we present: "the sacrifice of praise"; and in 1 Peter 2:5, "to offer spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God by Jesus Christ". These are rather higher than that in our chapter -- the presentation of our bodies. But it is remarkable that they are to be presented a living sacrifice; not sacrifices, but "a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable to God, which is your intelligent service".

C.A.M. The fact that the word sacrifice is used, would you say, means that our bodies are now actuated

by another life? Death must come in in some sense.

J.T. Quite so. While our bodies are, of course, physical, the power of presentation is in another life. Chapter 8:10 says, "If Christ be in you, the body is dead on account of sin, but the Spirit life on account of righteousness". Much may be done in the sense of service, which may not enter into what is formally collective in the assembly. The disciples inquired from the Lord, "Where wilt thou that we go and prepare, that thou mayest eat the passover?" (Mark 14:12). What they did was on the principle of sacrifice. The man that bore the pitcher of water would be on that principle. He was the leader. But all that preceded the service, which began as the Lord placed Himself at table, the apostles with Him.

D.P. Would it be right to say that the enemy has made man's body a battleground and God took the issue up with him? And the fact now that man is able to present his body a living sacrifice is victory, in man, by God.

J.T. Quite so. God attains victory in man. He begins at the bottom -- in the believer's body. I would say that Peter gives us the proper level of the service of God; in his first epistle we are said to be priests, "to offer spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God by Jesus Christ". I think that is somewhat beyond Romans 12. The body of the believer hardly rises to the level of the spiritual sacrifice, but still it is a sacrifice.

R.W.S. Is the renewed mind, which comes in in the next verse, a little in advance of the thought of the body? It speaks of being transformed by the renewing of the mind.

J.T. Well, that would show that the whole man is in view, and the renewal begins with the mind. It is, of course, a faculty or member of the man. It is closely allied with the spirit of a man. Man is a tripartite being: spirit, soul and body. The spirit is the highest feature

and the mind is allied closely with it and, therefore, I would say it enters into the service of God directly because we are said to "have the mind of Christ". That is, our renewed mind is really the mind of Christ which the Spirit uses.

H.G.H. Why do you think the body is referred to before the mind?

J.T. I think it is to build up the subject. God began with man's body, but he was lifeless. God breathed into him and that made him a living soul; and we read later that the spirit returns to God who gave it. In animals it does not, although they have spirits too, in some sense, but the animal's spirit does not return to God. It goes down with him, whereas man's spirit goes to God who gave it. He is in this sense constituted a spiritual being. He has received his spirit from God. It is the highest part of him. It is himself, really. He may become disembodied, which would be the severance, for the moment, of the physical side, but the man is there and it is in that spirit that, as a believer, he worships God.

A.N.W. Would you say that the body in the chapter referred to is an offset in totality to the members mentioned in Romans 3, severally? Certain members of the man are mentioned there, but now we have the totality of the body committed to God.

J.T. Yes. The contrast in chapter 12 is striking. The renewal of the mind, spoken of in chapter 12, adds much to the subject before us as qualifying the believer for the higher levels of Colossians and Ephesians.

A.I. Would the truth be carried forward in the believer presenting his body in this way? The truth of the kingdom would be maintained in the body of the believer.

J.T. It would. It is a question of God in Romans. It is not so much Christ or His body. The main point is what accrues to God. It is God's service. God's fruit and God's righteousness. Therefore, the kingdom of

God is prominent and, of course, the body of the believer becomes the vehicle of that, in an outer sense, but the mind is more than that. It is allied with the spirit which returns to God. It goes up to God. The intelligent service of the believer is to be noted. It is over against the meaningless customs of the heathen, and much of Judaism. The unconverted man could not have that. It could be seen only in a Christian. And it is said. Be not conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, that ye may prove what is the good and acceptable and perfect will of God, verse 2. The mind is the controlling thought therefore, and subject, as it were, to the spirit of the believer; but it is the controlling thought -- proving, testing out things. You thus know where you are For in result, according to (1 Corinthians 2:16), "we have the mind of Christ", meaning the thinking faculty of Christ. We can think and judge and discern according to Christ.

A.N.W. "Intelligent service" implies the mind, does it not?

J.T. That is what I was thinking. The word 'intelligent' carries that thought.

A.A.T. Have we not to control the mind?

J.T. "I myself with the mind ..." chapter 7:25. That is another thing; that is the person. "I myself with the mind serve God's law". That is the ego which God holds responsible.

A.I. Why does transformation come in first before the renewing of the mind?

J.T. The word conformed is used as regards the world, and then, "Be transformed by the renewing of your mind", as if you must have the mind before there can be a transformation. The Lord will transform our bodies presently, Philippians 3:21. That will be His will, but this is our mind; our mind is to be employed in the transformation.

R.R.T. Would we have an example of this in Saul of

Tarsus? He said he thought that he ought to do many things, but then when the light shone on him on the way to Damascus, he said, "What shall I do, lord?" Would that indicate at least the initial stages of this transforming of the mind?

J.T. I am sure that is so. That was before he got the Spirit, showing that the work of the Spirit in the believer, the new birth, carries with it something that can be employed and that will respond to God in some sense.

A.R. Why is e bringing in the will of God? "The god and acceptable and perfect will of God".

J.T. We can understand that I think. We are dealing with the kingdom of God and it turns through Romans: the gospel of God concerning His son. It is God right through, as we have been saying.

E.E.H. Would the thought of numbering the tribes in the early chapters of Numbers correspond in any way with this service here?

J.T. It would. The nearest approach to that would be in the body. "We, being many, are one body". The position was that that the tabernacle was in the centre. The first idea in numbers is the encampment and then the decampment. I think the body in verse 4 corresponds: "For, as in one body we have many members, but all the members have not the same office; thus we, being many, are one body in Christ, and each one members one of the other". That is the basic idea of Numbers in the type.

The position in numbers is that persons were taken from twenty years old and above. That is, we are regarded as Christians in the full sense, having the spirit. And then each pitches by the standard of his father's house, which is a family thought, and then the tribes, and then the camp which would be subdivided: Judah had three; Reuben had three; Ephraim had three and Dan had three. There were four threes. The whole number, therefore, was seen in the type. There were encampments and then decampments, the latter having in

mind movements from place to place; but the tabernacle, as in camp, was the centre always.

A.B.P. Is there a moral sequence in the description of the will of God? It is the good and acceptable and perfect will of God. Do we realise that sequence experimentally?

J.T. Through it, I believe, you reach restfulness -- that is, in the acceptable will of God. You are not irritable, as they soon began to be in the camp of Israel. They complained in the fringes of the camp; but as you accept the will of God, you are restful. In fact, you are satisfied with your allotment. For instance, Judah had the eastern position; he faced the sun rising. The members of that camp would also be favoured as having the first place. The sun rose on them. Hope would be inspired in their hearts. And then Reuben had the southern aspect. He also would get favourable circumstances, tending to warmth; Ephraim less favourable because of the west, the setting sun, tending to disappointment; and Dan the north, cold winds and their accompaniments. But I should say that the acceptableness of the will of God would satisfy all. There would never be a rebellion, such as Numbers 16 records, if all were satisfied with their positions. They complained against Moses and Aaron.

C.A.M. That would bring in the operation of the mind as seen in verse 3. Korah and his company had high, ambitious thoughts; they were "men of renown".

J.T. Think of how Paul was affected himself: "For I say, through the grace which has been given to me", verse 3; That is, he was furnished for all the heavy tax upon him in the service. He is speaking to us as himself having reached the thought of grace which satisfies, which makes us restful. "For I say, through the grace which has been given to me, to every one that is among you, not to have high thoughts above what he should think; but to think so as to be wise, as God has dealt to each a measure of faith".

C.A.M. That would suggest that Judah would not have undue thoughts about himself.

J.T. Quite so. It would have saved Korah, Dathan and Abiram if they were content with what they had. In rebelling against Moses and Aaron they claimed priesthood and apostleship. But such men would claim everything. They were not satisfied with their lot; whereas this chapter would make us satisfied.

R.R.T. In verse 2 Paul says, "that ye may prove", and then in verse 3 he says, "For I say, through the grace which has been given to me". Would that indicate that he for himself had proved it?

J.T. That is just it. He could speak with authority in this sense to the brethren anywhere, especially the Corinthians and the Romans.

R.R.T. And now he wants them to prove it.

J.T. Just so. He says, "By God's grace I am what I am", (1 Corinthians 15:10). You could not get a better man anywhere than Paul, or a more satisfied man. He was poured out as a libation on the sacrifice and ministration of the faith of the Philippian saints, and rejoiced in it.

D.P. Why does the apostle base his appeal on the compassions rather than the power of God?

J.T. "I beseech you therefore, brethren, by the compassions of God". It is a striking appeal. The allusion is to what had come out in the rich unfolding of the gospel seen in this epistle. Of course, the power of God is stressed in Romans also, as seen in chapter 1:16, but the compassions of God are in special accord with the basic gospel epistle, corresponding with the gospel of Luke. The third measurement of the river in Ezekiel 47 brought the prophet to the loins, and in the fourth measurement he reached waters to swim in, a river that could not be passed through. That suggests the realm of God. Compassions may be connected with the loins.

R.W.S. While each presents his body, yet "a measure of faith" is discriminating. Would you say something about that? "As God has dealt to each a measure of faith".

J.T. It is not exactly the gifts that are spoken of in Ephesians or 1 Corinthians. It is a measure of faith here. That is to say, one of the basic things in the economy is faith. Our side of the position is faith. We come into it by faith, and we are in it by measure too; so that each one has not the same faith. Here you are supposed to have faith according to measure.

J.A.P. Was Caleb a man like that? He says, at the age of eighty-five years, "I am as strong this day as I was on the day that Moses sent me", that is to search out the land. His body was preserved and his faith too.

J.T. Yes. He had a measure, which is a very important thing -- what measure of faith a man has. We all have not the same measure. It is not exactly gift, the power for service, but faith.

A.N.W. Would you just distinguish between the grace measure and the faith measure? Both are referred to in that verse: "For I say, through the grace which has been given to me", and then at the end, "As God has dealt to each a measure of faith". Do these run along collaterally?

J.T. The word measure applied to faith is very noticeable. I do not know that grace is put that way. "For I say, through the grace which has been given to me". And in verse 6, "But having different gifts, according to the grace that has been given to us". And, as to faith, "to every one that is among you, not to have high thoughts above what he should think; but to think so as to be wise, as God has dealt to each a measure of faith". That is, as to faith, you are to know your measure. But in verse 3 Paul is dealing with grace as something he experienced himself. I do not know that it is measured. I think it is that God acts on that principle. In verse 6 and in Ephesians 4:7 grace, connected with measure,

refers to gift. It is operational. Paul had it. He says, as we already remarked, "By God's grace I am what I am". You could hardly say what that was in the sense of measure. It is a great operational thought of God, and Paul was the subject of it; and it is in the power of that that he exhorts as to the measure of faith. So that the believers in Rome should know each other in these respects, and it is a great point now that we should know each other in the same sense, because there is much ability for service. And we can thank God for it; but the time will come when we shall be tested as to our faith. We may have more ability or gift than we have faith.

A.N.W. In Ephesians 4, as noted, the apostle says, "But to each one of us has been given grace according to the measure of the gift of the Christ", (Ephesians 4:7).

J.T. That is another thing, as we have been saying. I do not think it is just what we have here. This is a great operational thought of God, and Paul is the subject of it, but to each one of us has been given grace, which is gift, but not in the sense of specific gift. He is going to deal with specific gifts later in Ephesians 4, and these come from beyond the heavens. The Lord Jesus is said to have passed beyond all the heavens and has given gifts to men; in relation to men; and these gifts are specified. But every believer has been given grace according to the measure of the gift of Christ. The question of gift has to be distinguished in all this; specific gift or powers which are to be used in the service of God.

R.W.S. And this verse justifies a brother in not accepting a service which the brethren might ask him to take on and which he feels he is not equal to. It says, "think so as to be wise", verse 3. The thought is to have a sober judgment.

J.T. Quite so. There is the idea of travel, too, which would enter into that. If you are invited to the Pacific coast you would have to travel six thousand miles for a

few days of service. Well, you have to be sober as to that, to be balanced. We must consider that the Lord is in charge of His services. He is Prince of the prince of the Levites, and He would reckon costs. I am only referring to the matter in a general way. You are referring to the matter in a general way. You are referring to the thought that you have to think soberly, including measure. If we are not in balance we are out of accord with the universe. Thus we have to be balanced in what we are doing.

C.A.M. Paul could travel with Illyricum as an objective, (Romans 15:19,20).

J.T. He thought of going to Spain and he would go via Rome, but we do not know if he went there. He had already gone from Jerusalem and round about to Illyricum, which would be near the Adriatic. In that territory he had "fully preached the glad tidings of the Christ". That implied measure.

A.P.T. It says in Acts 16 that he attempted to go to Bithynia, but the Spirit changed his course.

J.T. Yes. He had assayed to go there but the Spirit of Jesus suffered him not. There is balance. The Spirit of Jesus: the feelingness of the Lord Jesus was in the service.

R.W.S. Does the divine system, as it operates, enable one to judge this in himself? Without taking counsel or speaking to the brethren, he comes to a sober judgment in himself.

J.T. Quite so, although it is quite right to take counsel. I would say that Apollos took counsel with Paul, or Paul took counsel with Apollos as to a certain service. He wanted Apollos to go to Corinth, but Apollos had decided he would not at the time go; but Paul wished him to go, and I should think Apollos was right, (1 Corinthians 16:12).

A.A.T. I understand gift is universal, and if it is, why could not Paul be of service anywhere?

J.T. You have to weigh carefully what you say when referring to universality. Paul had gift and as we have just heard, the Spirit at a certain time would not allow him to speak the word in Asia. God could use Paul in China if He wished to, but there is no evidence that any of the apostles went there, so that we have to be careful about that; because the fact that I have gift does not mean I should go to China. There are other things that have to be thought of, such as Levitical order and principles, and the Lord holds these things in His hands. He is the Prince of the princes of the Levites, and we have to serve under His orders.

H.G.H. Would you say grace would help us in that? Paul says, "But by God's grace I am what I am; and his grace, which was towards me, has not been vain", (1 Corinthians 15:10).

J.T. He tells us how successful he was in his service and he finished his course, too. He could go up to heaven with flying colours, so to speak; I am only using a figure: "For thus shall the entrance into the everlasting kingdom of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ be richly furnished unto you", (2 Peter 1:11). That is the idea. In effect Paul said, I have laboured under Levitical principles and nevertheless I have finished my course. God could have kept Paul alive in service for a thousand years but that is not the divine way. He had only one Paul, but still we cannot say that he remained in service a longer period than others.

J.T.Jr. Does Timothy show how the thing operates? He was well known in his own locality, Lystra and Derbe, and Paul took him afield for further labours.

J.T. Yes. He was well recommended by the brethren, and Paul took him on that ground. He proved afterwards how useful he was to him; but what we are saying is very important, because God is using the brethren. He is opening up services, but we must

observe principles: and our Eleazar, who is the Prince of the princes of the Levites. That implies that there are influences above us that we should not despise, but rather value as divine provisions. Apollos did not despise Paul, but yet he did not at a particular time go to Corinth. The fact is it was in favour of Paul that he did not go to Corinth; he would not countenance any rivals of the apostle and some of them were there.

A.P.T. The verse we have been dwelling on says, "To every one that is among you ..." and then, "... above what he should think". Are the every one and the he abstract, or do they refer to the brothers in Rome only?

J.T. Well, the instruction here, of course, would come to us now. It is a question of applying it to yourself.

A.P.T. It follows on in a similar way in verse 6, "... having different gifts", etc. Is this instruction to all or only the servants of God?

J.T. It says, "But having different gifts, according to the grace which has been given to us, whether it be prophecy, let us prophesy according to the proportion of faith; or service, let us occupy ourselves in service; or he that teaches, in teaching", verses 6,7. That is, it may be a plural or a singular. "Let us" and then, "he that teaches". Therefore, it applies at any time to whom it may apply. When gift is mentioned, those in particular service are in mind. It is a question of each of us now looking into the matter and seeing how things are going with us generally, and whether we are fitting in according to the principles governing our service.

R.W.S. The powers that be, chapter 13, might limit Levitical service, especially in view of conditions as they exist now, but this chapter teaches that one thinks a particular matter over himself and weighs it as to whether he is balanced as pursuing his service.

J.T. Yes. Chapter 12 affords guidance for normal

Levitical work and therefore it applies to us all -- brothers and sisters.

J.H.H. "And Samuel judged Israel all the days of his life. And he went from year to year in circuit to Bethel, and Gilgal, and Mizpah, and judged Israel in all those places", (1 Samuel 7:16). Would that be a well-balanced circuit?

J.T. Yes. And he came back to his house. That is another good thought, showing how those who serve ought to have houses, or at least, bases to which they can return. Paul and Barnabas, for instance, returned to Antioch and remained quite a while with the brethren, although they had already finished one bit of work, showing the Levitical work is in parts. It is let out, as it were, by the great Head. You finish the bit you get and return to where you came from, and get another bit.

J.H.H. I think that is a principle.

J.T. We have to understand the principle, and then make an application of it. To get the right principle as to any work is very important.

R.R.T. In relation to Samuel it is said, "And all Israel, from Dan even to Beer-sheba, knew that Samuel was established a prophet of Jehovah", (1 Samuel 3:20). He covered the whole territory in that way.

J.T. "And Jehovah was with him, and let none of his words fall to the ground", verse 19.

R.R.T. So that God in His provision for us would take account of the territory, and we in outlying districts can look to God in faith that the whole territory will be provided for.

J.T. Quite so, in our prayers; because all have not gift, ability to serve men in that way, but ability to serve God in prayer. That does not need gift; we can cover, by prayer, the whole area of the service.

T.E.H. The Lord Jesus said, Luke 10:2, that we should pray to the Lord of the harvest, on account of it being great, suggesting the Lord needs servants.

J.T. If the harvest is white it ought to be reaped; that is the reaping time.

D.P. The principles of circulation that are set out in Ecclesiastes 1 can be seen working now in the Spirit's day: the sun arising and hasting to its place where it ariseth, the wind returning again to its circuits, etc. Although the service of God is limited today, yet these principles that are set out in the chapter referred to are universal in their operation.

J.T. Of course. Psalm 19 contemplates the heavens and the course of the sun and the constellations. These, of course, stand, and places afield, to which we were referring, stand too, as under God's government. The field alluded to in Matthew 13:44 -- He bought "that field" -- may allude to some specific part of the earth rather than to it all. The Lord had in mind where the assembly is to be found. We can show that historically, if we follow the lines of the gospel. The apostles did not go east; they came west and the work still goes on in the west.

T.E.H. Would Ruth 2:8,9 help us on that? "And Boaz said to Ruth, Hearest thou not, my daughter? Go not to glean in another field, neither go from here, but keep here with my maidens. Let thine eyes be on the field which is being reaped".

J.T. That is in conformity with what we are saying. Let us find out where the Lord is working and continue there. But we must proceed with our subject -- the kingdom of God in Romans. Chapter 13 is a well-known passage that applies to the present time; kingdom principles in Christians in non-combatant military service. This chapter has a great place in regard to them. It is not that we belong to the kingdoms of this world. We do not. We are strangers and foreigners as regards that. But there are certainly principles of the kingdom which have great importance in relation to the powers that be, as to how we obey them, and what spirit we show; whether we are like Christ in the service we may be

rendering. So that what we get is, "Let every soul be subject", which would point to the soul of a Christian. It is the soul of a Christian, and what it implies. It is a feeling part; it is the compassionate part of a Christian. "Let every soul be subject to the authorities that are above him. For there is no authority except from God; and those that exist are set up by God. So that he that sets himself in opposition to the authority resists the ordinance of God; and they who thus resist shall bring sentence of guilt on themselves", verses 1, 2. And then it says, "For rulers are not a terror to a good work, but to an evil one ... for it is God's minister to thee for good". That is, to the Christian. And it further says, "Wherefore it is necessary to be subject, not only on account of wrath, but also on account of conscience", verse 5. Conscience comes in under the principles of the kingdom -- the conscience in its relation with the powers that be.

J.T.Jr. Verse 2 would be that if we do set ourselves against the authorities, it would be an act of our wills. The will would be in activity to what God had set up.

J.T. The ordinances of God; that is, not Levitical ordinances -- it is another department. It is the ordinances of God in which He uses the powers that be. They may not be converted men. We have to get ordinances as regards Levitical work from the Lord as Priest. But now we are dealing with another department of God, that is, governments which God has ordained for the present government of the nations; and it is a most important thing to bear in mind, that we are to be subject because of conscience. The word "soul" is used in verse 1, but "conscience" in verse 5.

J.S. It is not a question here of whether the authorities be good or bad.

J.T. It is no question of that at all. It might even be a Nero.

A.R. God speaks about Nebuchadnezzar as "My servant". Is that the idea?

J.T. Just so.

J.A.P. What is the difference between Matthew 17, where the Lord Jesus suggests that the sons are free, and the attitude that we are to show here?

J.T. Well, the sons are free. It was a question of the temple tax, not a national or political tax, but a temple tax. It was imposed on Jews, and the Lord raises the question with Peter as to whether the sons should be subject to that. Those who received it asked Peter if the Lord paid this tax. Peter replied that He did. The Lord knew what had happened, but He waited until Peter came into the house before He mentioned the matter to him. It involved the family of God and the Lord wished Peter to be instructed as to it. The saints of God are His sons, and they belong to heaven. Therefore, He says to Peter, "The kings of the earth, from whom do they receive custom or tribute? from their own sons or from strangers? Peter says to him. From strangers. Jesus said to him. Then are the sons free", (Matthew 17:25,26). He further says, "But that we may not be an offence to them, go to the sea and cast a hook, and take the first fish that comes up, and when thou hast opened its mouth thou wilt find a stater; take that and give it to them for me and thee". It is enough for two people to pay the tax. He says. Go and give it to them for me and thee. But that was "that we may not be an offence". It was not due. Heaven would not collect it; the true house of God would not collect it from His sons. That is the point there. There is the idea of the family, and what the Lord teaches there is most precious, especially in Matthew. Matthew treats of the assembly, and the assembly is formed of sons, and that characterizes the assembly in our relations with God; we are immune from temple taxes there. God is not imposing them. If you ask for fellowship, if you want to come into fellowship with Christians, you need only to wash your robes. You do not have to pay taxes. You can enter by the

gates and partake of the tree of life. You have rights there, which are most precious.

W.F.K. "Pay then what is Caesar's to Caesar, and what is God's to God", (Matthew 22:21). That would apply here.

J.T. Just so. So that our word in chapter 13 will be effective if the brethren, especially the young men, will see that the authorities have rights in their own departments. We would not let them come into this meeting to take part, but in their own department they are God's ministers. As we see in Zechariah 6, the four chariots having red, black, white and grisled horses are the four spirits of the heavens which stand before God -- that is, the four gentile monarchies, but they do not belong to the assembly. But at the same time, this instruction appeals to the brethren; to their souls in verse 1, and then in verse 5 to their consciences.

R.R.T. I would like to ask one question about verse 5. An unconverted person might be subject on account of wrath. If he is not subject wrath may come upon him; but does the apostle here indicate a higher standard than that for us? We are not subject only on account of wrath, but also on account of conscience.

J.T. Yes. The brethren should see that in this matter of subjection to the government in these military affairs, conscience enters into it; not only does it bear towards God as to His rights in the Christian, but also His rights in the authorities. Then, as regards chapter 14 the matter of the weak brother's faith comes up: we have already been speaking of the measure of faith, but there is hardly any measure here, but faith is weak and consideration must be extended to such.

A.B.P. Would it be right to say that faith is given by God? Does chapter 12 support the statement that faith is the gift of God?

J.T. Yes. Only that when you say that, you ought to add something as to the way it comes. Faith comes by

hearing, and hearing by the word of God. We have a moral element in the thing, and the means by which it comes is the word of God, which, I think, is very important, that you are governed by the word of God. "Faith then is by a report, but the report by God's word", (Romans 10:17).

A.B.P. It is an element which God gives in that sense, through this moral process, but then as given, are we responsible to enlarge it through using it?

J.T. Surely. The apostles said to the Lord, "Increase our faith". But then He said, "If ye have faith as a grain of mustard seed, ye shall say to this mountain. Be transported hence there, and it shall transport itself". But at the same time we have the idea of growth in faith. The Thessalonians' faith increased exceedingly, (2 Thessalonians 1:3).

A.P.T. Verse 1 speaks of "the faith"; is that the understanding of the truth as set forth in this book so far?

J.T. "The faith" means Christian faith, involving what is believed as instructions or principles. The brother contemplated here is weak in it, but he has it.

A.P.T. He is hardly able to stand -- as a board of the tabernacle. He is weak in it. He needs someone to stand beside him.

J.T. Yes, but he is "in the faith", and that implies that he is a real Christian. There are many you meet that seem to be interested in the truth, but you are not sure whether they are real Christians. This man is a real Christian. He is weak in it, but he is in it. As we sometimes say, the ocean is in the basket and the basket in the ocean. It is only a little bit of it, but he is in it.

A.P.T. The teaching is to help him on kingdom lines.

J.T. The teaching helps him; and your conduct, too, for example, helps him especially as you eat and drink. You are a rich man spiritually; you have the Spirit of God; you are instructed in the truth of the kingdom of God, and hence you can afford to bear with his scruples

and be deprived of certain things for his sake. You do not want to submit to him if he is a prohibitionist or some other extreme legalist.

THE KINGDOM OF GOD (4)

1 Corinthians 1:10 - 16; 1 Corinthians 4:17 - 21; 1 Corinthians 5:1 - 13

J.T. So far in the pursuit of our subject, which is the kingdom of God, we have considered Romans. It is now thought that we should look into 1 Corinthians so as to see how the kingdom affects the assembly as such. It will be found here that the relation of the kingdom and the assembly is very definite -- the one bearing on the other; that is, the kingdom bearing on the assembly and the assembly bearing on the kingdom. The idea of the kingdom is more general. In any given country the kingdom includes the whole realm, whereas the idea of the assembly would be represented by the administrative capital; if we keep these things in mind we shall proceed more smoothly. We will see how the kingdom will assist us in functioning in the assembly and, on the other hand, that the assembly will help us in functioning in the kingdom. It will be noticed that the kingdom is referred to in this section, and it is said to be "in power". In Romans in a similar way it is said to be "righteousness, and peace, and joy in the Holy Spirit". But the idea of power evidently is the leading thought in this section, and it is in view of conditions that existed in Corinth -- that had got out of hand. Lawless conditions had arisen and they had to be dealt with in authority, with a rod; at least, that was what the apostle suggested. Therefore, when such conditions arise, what is needed is what is represented in the word rod; that is, chastisement, or, in some sense, punishment; not exactly penalty, but that which effects subjection and restraint. The judgment rendered on the incestuous man, chapter 5, is representative of that principle. Before that we have stated the evil of division among the brethren in Corinth. It is the first complaint the apostle has; indeed, in which he uses the word exhort in dealing with it. "Now I exhort you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye all say the same thing, and

that there be not among you divisions; but that ye be perfectly united in the same mind and in the same opinion", chapter 1: 10. The name of the Lord Jesus being brought in here is an allusion to the kingdom; that by which His administrative authority is wielded here below; hence, we have in Matthew, gathering together to the name of our Lord Jesus Christ. "For where two or three are gathered together unto my name, there am I in the midst of them", chapter 18:20. His authority and all else in the sense of administration is carried on in His name; His name taking the place of Himself. He is in heaven personally, but His name here represents Himself, the Spirit in us supporting it.

A.A.T. Is Matthew 18 kingdom truth?

J.T. That is just what it is. The passage has been often quoted and spoken of, but to illustrate that it is kingdom truth, we have only to refer to the opening part of the chapter. It is said, "In that hour the disciples came to Jesus saying. Who then is greatest in the kingdom of the heavens? And Jesus having called a little child to him, set it in their midst, and said. Verily I say to you, Unless ye are converted and become as little children, ye will not at all enter into the kingdom of the heavens. Whoever therefore shall humble himself as this little child, he is the greatest in the kingdom of the heavens; and whosoever shall receive one such little child in my name, receives me", verses 1 - 5.

W.R. You spoke of the administrative capital of any realm. What did you have in mind?

J.T. Spiritually, that is the assembly. The assembly as down here is the administrative representation of the Lord in heaven; therefore, the word is, "If also he will not listen to the assembly, let him be to thee as one of the nations and a tax-gatherer". He is lawless.

C.A.M. We often speak of Matthew's gospel as being the assembly gospel. Would it be right to say that the assembly is really in a kingdom setting?

J.T. It is; just as we have been saying about the idea of the capital. Jerusalem, for instance, was the administrative centre of the kingdom of Israel.

C.A.M. I was glad of your allusion to Matthew's gospel, because the two great thoughts come into it.

A.N.W. Could you make a practical suggestion as to how the assembly bears on the kingdom? It is dear as far as I can see that the kingdom bears on the assembly, but you made the remark that the assembly bears on the kingdom.

J.T. I think it is illustrated in this case of discipline in Corinth. It is an administrative procedure; therefore, the question of evidence comes up at once. In the administration of authority in the assembly bearing on the whole kingdom, the question of evidence immediately comes up, as in chapter 5. "It is universally reported", it says, alluding to the necessity for evidence in the administrative function of the assembly which affects the whole kingdom. And in chapter 1 we have a like suggestion as to the house of Chloe. The report on which the apostle went was said to have come from that house. "For it has been shewn to me concerning you, my brethren, by those of the house of Chloe, that there are strifes among you", verse 11. There is, therefore, stressed in this section the necessity for evidence in carrying out assembly administration in the way of discipline, or whatever else it may be, but especially as to discipline.

A.P.T. Is the capital movable?

J.T. In a way it is, because it is pretty much illustrated in Samuel's circuit. He judged Israel on the principle of a circuit. Names of the places where he judged Israel are given. The centre of authority now would be the nearest local assembly.

A.R. Is that why Matthew speaks of Jerusalem as the city of the great King? It is also spoken of in Matthew as the holy city.

J.T. That shows how the truth was held, and that those who arose from the dead after the Lord was raised, entered into the holy city and appeared unto many. They would be there in testimony.

E.McK. What is stressed in the expression "universally reported", chapter 5:1?

J.T. I think Paul had in his mind that the sad conditions that had come about in Corinth were known among the brethren generally. What helps in that, I think, is that in the second letter he says, "known and read of all men", chapter 3:2. The writing in the hearts of the Corinthians corresponded with the writing in Paul s heart. Paul had the saints in Corinth in his heart and he brought the thought of Corinth out wherever he had opportunity. Wherever he had opportunity, he brought it forward; so that all men, meaning all the saints, had an opportunity of reading and knowing conditions at Corinth. They were good conditions at the tune of the second letter, but in this epistle what is reported would be of a sorrowful nature, but the saints would be concerned about Corinth; as if God would have it to be so, that one meeting is so prominent in the economy of God here below that the brethren are talking about it. And it often happens from our own observation that certain sections of the world are before the brethren. Something has happened that occasions concern and the brethren are praying about it.

A.N.W. Are you stating that the universality of the report was in the assembly?

J.T. I would think so. It would be a public matter. We have to judge from the context who would talk about it, although the worldlings in Corinth itself might speak of the conduct there, but I would think it was the concern of the brethren through common report among them. Paul would not attach importance to others than those who were really brethren.

A.A.T. I am wondering about the extent of the

concern the assembly at Ephesus or the assembly at Colosse might have had about the exercises at Corinth. Could they interfere? Could the saints at Ephesus adjust the difficulties at Corinth?

J.T. We should go by what we have before us now. It would be a question of common report. If there is such report, then there is good ground for brethren to interfere, not in the sense of correction or setting things right; that belongs primarily to the local brethren, but in the sense of the general truth of the body of Christ and the unity of the Spirit; it is a universal matter. There is only one assembly in the full thought, and if there is anything wrong in a place, it is the concern of all. So that I think what is just before us helps. Paul is dealing with something that was wrong in Corinth and being reported commonly, it became of universal concern. You might say. What have they to do with it? But they have to do with it, because each of us is concerned about things being right. We love the Lord; we love the brethren; we want to see things right for the Lord's sake and for the sake of the truth and the brethren; and pray about them.

A.R. There were gifts at Corinth. Was there the gift of government?

J.T. That is another point. Government is a gift and, of course, the gift is universal. It can be applied anywhere. It can be applied wherever it is needed, just as an evangelical gift can be used. I think that is important to keep before us.

A.A.T. I just want to get clear as to how far brethren who are not local can adjust, or try to adjust, difficulties in a nearby meeting.

J.T. That is important, because it is just in that sense that Paul speaks here. Paul certainly was not in Corinth. He was outside. He had been resident at Corinth but had left it, nevertheless he certainly had a hand in what was going on in Corinth now.

A.A.T. But he was an apostle.

J.T. Quite so; we have none now; and yet if there is a brother who has the gift of government, for instance, he has power; more power than the ordinary, and that ought to be used. There are many other things that can be said too, as to what can be done in the way of prayer and taking counsel, advice, etc. I would like to be clear about what is in your mind. I should not like to say anything that is not fair. You had better tell us something more if you think there is anything going on that is not according to the mind of God.

A.A.T. I would like to get dear just how far outside brethren can give judgment on a local matter.

J.T. It cannot be final, but yet we are to have a judgment -- at least a general judgment of what is current in the assembly. Wherever a thing happens, it is a concern to us all and then, of course, to the adjacent brethren. For instance, in the types measurements are taken; according to Deuteronomy 21, where anything serious happens, measurements are taken to the cities round about, and the nearest city is particularly involved. That chapter has important instruction in the matter we have before us.

F.S.C. Paul speaks about his spirit being gathered together with the Corinthians, chapter 5:4. Do not the spirits of the brethren have an effect on the adjoining gatherings?

J.T. Quite so. After all, there is only one body; "There is one body and one Spirit, as ye have been also called in one hope of your calling", (Ephesians 4:4).

E.A.L. It might seem that while it is recognised that gift is universal the difficulty sometimes is that a certain area might not recognise this principle, or discriminate against particular ones. Paul would be recognised anywhere in virtue of his ministry.

J.T. As an apostle he would be. We have to analyse what we are saying as to the accuracy of it. Paul, of

course, was an apostle as our brother says, and he speaks with authority here, but at the same time he is concerned about the accuracy of the information that was being circulated; besides, the state of the assembly at Corinth stood in the way of the Spirit -- it hindered the administration of discipline, hence the apostle's reproof here: "And ye are puffed up, and ye have not rather mourned, in order that he that has done this deed might be taken away out of the midst of you. For I, as absent in body but present in spirit, have already judged as present, to deliver, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ (ye and my spirit being gathered together, with the power of our Lord Jesus Christ), him that has so wrought this: to deliver him, I say, being such, to Satan for destruction of the flesh, that the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus", verses 2 - 5. The word being is interpolated there to give the sense, but the fact stressed is that the matter is really so. That is what he means by being such. I thought I would mention that, because evidence and accuracy are regarded by the apostle as so important, especially in cases involving discipline. Therefore, Paul asserts here that the man is really guilty. So we ought to be sure that whatever is given as a cause of discipline in a local gathering is really so. If there is any question about it brethren elsewhere are right in inquiring.

W.R. "For I, as absent in body but present in spirit, have already judged as present". It would seem that Paul covered the whole situation in his soul.

J.T. He stressed this point: "being such". It was not in his mind a matter of doubt, it is a principle that he is keeping before us.

F.N.W. Is not the gift of government set there by God to reflect back on Himself in the way of glory? Do you think what might enable a locality to receive outside help would be to ask. Is it for the glory of God?

J.T. Yes, and the general principle of unity must enter into it, for after all, in the full sense there is only

one assembly, as we have said: "There is one body and one Spirit, as ye have been also called in one hope of your calling; one Lord, one faith, one baptism; one God and Father of all, who is over all, and through all, and in us all", (Ephesians 4:4 - 6).

R.W.S. You alluded to the words: "that there be not among you divisions; but that ye be perfectly united in the same mind and in the same opinion". Does "the same opinion" go farther? Is that a stronger idea than "the same mind"?

J.T. The exhortation is to exclude divisions of judgment. The word mind is now being compared with the word opinion: the latter word conveys what is active, what is arrived at in the mind. The mind is basic, involving the faculty of thought. The brethren ought not, characteristically, to have different opinions. (Philippians 2:1 - 4), although having the same end in view, has stronger and finer feelings than the exhortations before us.

A.N.W. Referring to verse 5 of chapter 5 again, you would not deny that the power of delivering such a one to Satan for the destruction of the flesh was exclusively an apostolic act. Is that not entirely an apostolic act?

J.T. It is, but it synchronises with another action, which has to be borne in mind: "Remove the wicked person from amongst yourselves", verse 13. That is the same thing; only the first is apostolic action, including Christ's power -- "with the power of our Lord Jesus Christ". It is a question of divine power. We have already remarked that in this section the idea of the kingdom of God is power. That is the word used. And that is the point that is made in the delivering of the person to Satan. Paul had determined to do that, but it was in accord with the dispensation, for the man's ultimate salvation was in view. At the same time Paul did not do it by himself; the judgment was also the action

of the assembly. The removal was by them -- "from amongst yourselves".

A.N.W. What I wanted to get further help on was our brother's point. You spoke of having a judgment. Paul said that he had judged. I wondered whether that is allowable for each one of us, so that we may have unified judgment about the matter. But if I am outside of the locality how do I operate to make my judgment known where the case is questioned? I think that is the exercise.

J.T. That brings up the question of the body. The unity lies in the assembly and normally there is an influence bearing on that going on all the time, and if we are at all assembly brothers and sisters we will have an ear for tidings affecting the saints, so that the Spirit of God says, of a great work at Antioch, "The report concerning them reached the ears of the assembly which was in Jerusalem", (Acts 11:22). We have the idea of assembly ears; and everyone of us, if he loves the Lord and loves the assembly and loves the brethren, ought to have ears for such reports. The apostle refers here to a report of sin in Corinth that was common, and it was right for the brethren to inquire about it, for it was in the assembly. The next thing would be. Can I help? That is what Paul was doing.

R.W.S. Division and disorder at the Lord's supper were not sufficient in themselves to cause the saints to sit on the judgment seat, so to say. Did the Lord have to allow conditions to go as far as this to make the saints judicially minded at Corinth?

J.T. It would seem so. In chapter 6 they are told that even if they had to adjust ordinary matters among them it should be done by those little esteemed in the assembly. That does not mean that that person is the least thought of. It means that he is at least of the assembly. Chapter 6 is that the person is of the assembly and hence he is capable of judgment. He is "little

esteemed", but still he is esteemed; he belongs to the assembly and, therefore, is destined to judge the world, and even angels; he is qualified to judge. That places matters that seem ordinary on a high level. It were well if we were all more concerned about these matters and prayed about them, and if we have any advice to give let it be done in a comely way; for we are told that "in the multitude of counsellors there is safety", (Proverbs 11:14). And yet, there is the importance of the local idea in the assembly, especially as to discipline, for the case before us shows that they are to act -- to remove the wicked person from amongst themselves.

A.N.W. What would you suggest would be a comely way to give advice? Privately?

J.T. Take the house of Chloe. We do not know who it was; whether it was the sister herself or one of her children, or one of her servants. I would say it is illustrated in the types. We usually can find something in the types to help us, and so there was a matter that had to be accepted as information in regard to Nabal, the husband of Abigail. Nabal misbehaved. He rudely insulted David. One of Nabal's servants came and told Abigail. He did it in a comely way. That is as good an illustration as you can get of the house of Chloe. Let us look at it. It is said in (1 Samuel 25), "And one of Nabal's young men told Abigail, Nabal's wife, saying. Behold, David sent messengers out of the wilderness to bless our master; and he has insulted them. And the men were very good to us, and we were not hurt, neither missed we anything, as long as we companied with them, when we were in the fields. They were a wall to us both by night and day, all the while we were with them feeding the sheep. And now know and consider what thou wilt do, for evil is determined against our master, and against all his household; and he is such a son of Belial, that one cannot speak to him", verses 14 - 17. That is what I would consider a messenger who can give information in

regard to assembly matters; indeed Abigail is a type of the assembly.

E.McK. The house of Chloe would be a right or godly house. Evidence from such a house could be relied upon.

J.T. It would look as if Paul meant that, and knew she was reliable.

A.R. A local meeting is not independent by itself.

J.T. No. That is most important. We are not formed on the principle of what is called Congregationalism. That means that each assembly is independent of all the others. That is not of God at all, but it is what Congregationalism means; whereas the epistle to the Corinthians shows that whilst there are local assemblies, they are all inter-dependent and should in a comely way help each other.

W.F.K. In the type all Israel stoned Achan with stones.

J.T. And so the man that blasphemed in the camp -- those who heard him laid their hands upon his head and all the congregation stoned him. (Leviticus 24:14).

A.P.T. In Revelation 2 the message to the angel in Thyatira is, "All the assemblies shall know that I am he that searches the reins and the hearts", verse 23. Would that indicate that no local assembly is inviolate in this sense?

J.T. Yes. They are all to know what the Lord does. And here Paul is saying that they all do know this matter at Corinth. I think that is important.

A.P.T. What our brother suggested is in my mind as to whether a local company is inviolate in itself. I think that is where we need help, as to how far we can go, as our brother is raising the exercise.

J.T. We cannot claim to be independent because if my house is on fire all the neighbouring houses are in danger. They cannot sit there and do nothing.

J.T.Jr. Would not the sequel of the issues at Glanton

and Bethesda be that the saints should know what happened at those points and be clear in their souls as to the issues?

J.T. Just so. Bethesda opened the door to evil, and it was the concern of every brother in fellowship to see into that.

J.C. What has been brought forward is something in which there had not been any judgment arrived at Would the same principle apply after the judgment had been arrived at in the local assembly?

J.T. Well then, another question arises; Was the judgment arrived at correct?

J.C. I just wanted to know if the same principle would apply.

J.T. It would apply, because that is just what happened at Bethesda. Bethesda was in the city of Bristol and Plymouth was one hundred or more miles away. Well, Bethesda being in Bristol opened its door to evil in Plymouth; the action was taken, and hence it became the concern of all the saints: that door must be closed. That is what I was thinking as to what is before us now; whether the present judgment arrived at is correct. If it is not right it is damaging to the whole assembly. That is the principle of it.

J.C. I just wanted to get clear on that point.

J.T. I am sure we would be all thankful to get your mind, because I know our brother is referring to what you are referring to, and we are all here and we are linked up with each other, and we want to help each other, because that is the idea of these meetings You say the judgment was rendered: well, was that judgment right?

J.C. I just wanted to know if the same principle applied if the actual judgment was arrived at, and as long as that is clear I leave it.

A.N.W. Having gone so far, would you mind saying a word more as to what you were stressing as to a certain

matter being dealt with by a few, professedly in the Lord's name, and whether that might be a wrong action and need to be nullified?

J.T. That very thing happened with most sorrowful and extended results fifty-five years ago: what was called the Bexhill action. In a small meeting in a town called Bexhill, a letter of commendation from Greenwich was refused: the action was wrong, but the claim that was made was that the assembly had acted and, therefore, the saints generally must bow. But that was wrong. How can we bow to what is wrong? But many accepted it and became lost to the testimony. In this way an assumed assembly action may become an instrument of the enemy.

R.W.S. In Leviticus 4 it says, "And if the whole assembly of Israel sin inadvertently", verse 13. Could that be applied, as a type, to assembly judgments which might be wrong today?

J.T. Certainly. Inadvertently means the assembly has committed itself to an action that is not right, but they did not know about it. When it is brought to their attention they have to deal with it because they had sinned.

R.W.S. I wondered if the inadvertence would give credit for a right desire but sin was actually committed.

J.T. It is a sin nevertheless. If a thing is not right it is not right, and we are to pursue righteousness, (2 Timothy 2:22).

D.P. In 2 Samuel 20 when Sheba rebelled against David and Joab was sapping the walls and the wise woman there went to all the people in the city and had a judgment about Sheba and dealt with him -- would that bear on what you are saying?

J.T. Quite so; that is quite apropos of what we are saying. Joab was intending to destroy the city, and it was a question of her wisdom. The woman by her wisdom delivered the city. That is the point -- if there is

anyone in the nation like that. Of course, she happened to be in the city itself, but even if she were not, and if she were able to give the word of wisdom that would deliver the city, why should it not be acted upon?

A.R. Paul says, "... with all that in every place call on the name of our Lord Jesus Christ", (1 Corinthians 1:2). In every place. There should be the same gate, as it were, in each local assembly.

J.T. That is important to bring up, because the constitution of the assembly is indicated in the opening of the letter. You are quoting the beginning of the letter to Corinth. "... with all that in every place call on the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, both theirs and ours". That is universal; the universal link between us. At the same time, the apostle did not direct all the gatherings to put the man away. He directed only the local gathering at Corinth to do it. The word in chapter 5 is, "Remove the wicked person from amongst yourselves", verse 13. That was only directed to Corinth, and the other meetings, of course, would fall in with that, because it was manifestly right. Suppose it was rumoured that the man in question was innocent; I mean, that the removal was not just. That would be another matter, and Paul was very particular about that, to show that it was just.

E.W.S. What should my attitude be in relation to a man that I might think is innocent and have evidence that he is innocent? Do I abstractly accept the judgment or do I say I do not think the judgment was right?

J.T. Certainly if the man is innocent, he is innocent. That is the fact, but then others may think differently, and it therefore becomes a question of acting wisely so as to get them to see what you see; that is, what is right. Therefore, the question of evidence must come into it. This section of 1 Corinthians raises the whole question of evidence; the truth or falsehood of anything that is alleged.

A.T.D. Nabal's young man so spoke that Abigail hasted. Would you say that that has a bearing on the whole matter?

J.T. Just so. The thing was done; carried through.

E.W.S. Our hearts and our actions should be in accord with each other. We should be acting and speaking outwardly in relation to what our convictions are inwardly.

J.T. Our acting and speaking should agree with what is spoken of in the book of Revelation as a sea of glass. That is a transparent position. If my mind is contrary to my actions then I am not transparent. Therefore, the matter of evidence has to be gone into, and let it all be on a transparent basis, because after all we are brethren. We are of the assembly, we have the Spirit, and if there is anything that is to be known, well, let it be known simply. Let us be on the principle of transparency and confidence. There is no reason why we should not tell each other of what affects the assembly; if necessary make inquiry as to any specially important matter, and look into the facts. I suppose that is what you have in mind. Is it not possible to obtain the truth?

E.W.S. If one has a right exercise in relation to what has taken place in another place; if we are clear and steadfast and open in what we have to say, we may become a rallying point for what is right.

F.N.W. A few years ago there was ministry that was helpful in this area relating to the movements of Elijah and Elisha. You stressed at that time that it was necessary to be in the place in which a particular thing happened to obtain correct information. Is that related to this matter of evidence?

J.T. That is right too, but it does not carry fully. You can get information otherwise. You can get accurate information otherwise than by being in the place; I mean, by competent witnesses. We should have the truth, because there is so much that become

current in a matter of the kind now in mind that you cannot be sure of what you hear. Things are said that you marvel how they can be said, because of want of facts. The principle is: "In the mouth of two or three witnesses ...". The importance of witnesses is immense. That point is developed in Matthew 18 also. "In the mouth of two or three witnesses shall every matter be established", (2 Corinthians 13:1).

R.W.S. Would you say something about assembly action that does not go so far as removing the wicked person from amongst us?

J.T. That is another matter. That is to say, whether it be two stripes or five stripes. The Scriptures contemplate graded evil, so many "stripes" are administered according to the gravity of the case, Luke 12:47,48. Now, your question is whether matters involving discipline must always require withdrawal. No. For instance, in 2 Thessalonians 3:6, the saints are enjoined to shrink from a person. In chapter 5 here we are not to mix or eat with a wicked person, but in 2 Thessalonians 3:14 a case is contemplated where we are not to treat him as an enemy but exhort him as a brother, although to shrink from him on account of a certain course; if he is behaving badly, that is, if he fails to work or earn his living. His conduct is objectionable but yet he is not withdrawn from. I think that is an evidence of what you are saying. There are different cases. We have shrinking from a person in 2 Thessalonians and then in Romans 16:17,18 withdrawing from those that are causing division, contrary to right doctrine, turning away from them; and then in 1 Corinthians 5, a man put away for open wickedness.

A.N.W. In our chapter where the apostle says, as you have emphasised, "being such", is he by that statement putting the onus on Corinth to prove that he is that before they act?

J.T. Well, he is implying that he is such as is alleged;

and inferentially in every case of discipline the guilt should be clearly established.

A.P.F. One more question on the subject. Are we to accept the judgment of a local company in withdrawing from a person even if we think it is not right?

J.T. Well, it would be a question of the facts you are dealing with.

A.P.F. I am not referring to such a severe judgment as the apostle Paul speaks of here, but we sometimes hear that certain brethren have withdrawn from such-and-such a person. Perhaps it is a small company, very few and weak. We accept that judgment as being right, and yet others have serious misgivings.

J.T. As I said, the question is of facts. If there is serious cause for doubt there should be investigation. Will may be at work. Therefore, the question is whether we can arrive at the truth. I am certain that as depending on the Lord we can arrive at the truth in every case. It is necessary to do it. If there is evidence that the person withdrawn from is innocent or partially innocent, there should be diligent investigation, Deuteronomy 13:14; but if he is withdrawn from rightly, it is our responsibility to bow to the action.

J.C. I like what you said about care being exercised by those outside the locality. How do you think that should be done? Should they inquire of those who are responsible or any in the assembly before they pronounce a judgment on it themselves? Do you think that would be the correct way -- to go and ascertain the facts as far as they can before they have a judgment themselves?

J.T. I should not like to assume that the brethren were wrong in what they have done unless there was some evidence that they were wrong; so that we ought to have confidence in one another, that what we do is done for the Lord's sake and for His name. But if something comes to your notice that is questionable, then, of course,

the thing would be to inquire from the brethren.

J.C. If something comes to your notice that would seem irregular, the next thing would be to contact the brethren involved and ascertain the facts from them so that you can form a proper judgment.

J.T. I would say that fully, assuming that their testimony is adequate and without prejudice.

A.A.T. I was going to ask about this brother at Corinth -- they were not unanimous about his case, were they?

J.T. No, they were not. Paul says, "This rebuke which has been inflicted by the many"; many of the brethren were in it, but some were not. That is to be noticed too, because if the thing is to be done the brethren ought to know that it is to be done, and it should be done even if some are dissenting, otherwise we should never arrive at a judgment, or discipline in some cases. We cannot assume to get unanimity. You go by the facts of the case, and act before God as to them. He will support what is right.

J.A.P. Some of the facts that enter into a case might not be brought out, such as the state of the person. There may be facts of failure, but what is the state of the person? Is that not important?

J.T. What state the person is in is very important.

J.T.Jr. Would Timothy's position in Corinth be such that he could minister as God gave him the word? Although it might not carry the opinion of the local brethren, yet he had to minister what God gave him.

J.T. That is what you get here -- Timothy and his ministry in Corinth -- what he might say in the way of advice and what he might minister in Corinth. It is said, "For this reason I have sent to you Timotheus, who is my beloved and faithful child in the Lord, who shall put you in mind of my ways as they are in Christ, according as I teach everywhere in every assembly. But some have

been puffed up, as if I were not coming to you; but I will come quickly to you, if the Lord will; and I will know, not the word of those that are puffed up, but the power", (1 Corinthians 4:17 - 19). If Timothy is in Corinth, what is his status? and if he ministers, what is the importance of his ministry? Is that what you have in mind?

J.T.Jr. Yes, exactly. If he were there on the basis of a Levite, he would necessarily minister what God gave him, not what the people would expect him to give.

J.T. Yes. That is a principle governing Levitical service. Timothy had a place locally at Corinth in measure, as Paul would have. Paul sent him for that purpose; so that they might learn in him Paul's ways as they are in Christ.

A.R. It would have a universal bearing. It is the same truth wherever he goes.

J.T. Quite so. The idea of catholicity is important. If a principle is right in one place, it is right everywhere. It was thought that the kingdom in its relation to the assembly is one of the most important matters that could come before us, and I hope the Lord will help in what has been said. But there is much more that really needs to be said as to this matter of evidence, because there is such a proneness amongst us to say things trivially and loosely, and they turn out to be not the truth, and people repeat them and thus keep the brethren in a ferment.

W.F.K. You could not take up a matter unless there are witnesses.

J.T. We need witnesses in all questionable cases. "In the mouth of two or three witnesses shall every matter be established". Therefore, if anything is said and brethren have their attention called to it and it is shown that it is not true, then to continue in it is wickedness and destructive of the fellowship.

J.A.P. Is Paul specific in his words here? He says, "If any one called brother be fornicator, or avaricious, or idolater, or abusive, or a drunkard, or rapacious ..."

chapter 5:11. Those people have not committed just one act; they are constitutionally marked by the things stated.

J.T. Yes.

C.A.M. Would you say that what Paul stands for authoritatively, and what the household of Chloe and Timothy represent, are in principle existent today? If I understand it, Timothy stands for a characteristic personage that goes right on to the end of assembly history, so that that element would be present with us today, would it not?

J.T. I believe that is right.

C.A.M. I mean men of God. We are not without them.

J.T. That would bring up the question of who the person is, and whether he has Timothy's characteristics.

A.P.T. Timothy's commendation is that he cared with genuine feeling how the saints got on -- not went back!

F.N.W. You would be governed by what Paul says to Timothy in the first epistle. "I testify before God and Christ Jesus and the elect angels, that thou keep these things without prejudice, doing nothing by favour", chapter 5:21.

J.T. Yes. Timothy and Titus have a peculiar place and it is important to discover just what they do represent; what can be spoken of now as carrying their features through.

W.R. Would you say that it is really the qualities of a priestly judgment functioning in cases of difficulty? It is not judgment in a cold, callous way.

J.T. The true priest is a reliable man. In the law of leprosy, which enters into what we have been speaking of -- assembly administration -- the priest is supposed to be always there. It does not say; he is there. He is supposed to be there.

Rem. All of these things of which we have been

speaking, if operating in the assembly, would have decided effect on the kingdom.

J.T. That is true, because the kingdom comes in especially in these disciplinary matters. The kingdom comes in with authority. The kingdom and the assembly act and react upon each other. To use a figure, the kingdom is like the policeman. That is the idea. The kingdom implies power. The kingdom of God is in power; one in it characteristically can deal with a man even if he is unsubdued. You can deal with him.

Question. Does that imply the name of the Lord Jesus? It is said, "No one can say. Lord Jesus, unless in the power of the Holy Spirit", (1 Corinthians 12:3).

J.T. The power for maintaining order and discipline in the assembly lies in the Holy Spirit. The idea of enforcing the thought of the assembly is in the power of the Spirit, kingdom-wise, and that exists in persons.

A.P.T. At the end of 1 Kings 3 it says, "And all Israel heard of the judgment which the king had judged; and they feared the king, for they saw that the wisdom of God was in him, to do justice", verse 28. I wondered whether Solomon would suggest the way administration is carried on?

J.T. He established his qualification to rule by the wisdom he showed in that judgment. He said, "Bring me a sword", he would use it. He had power to use it, and that implies what we have been saying as to the kingdom. In the kingdom of God power is combined with wisdom, and that is illustrated in Solomon's reign.

THE KINGDOM OF GOD (5)

2 Corinthians 2:1 - 11; 2 Corinthians 7:6 - 11; 2 Corinthians 13:1 - 10; Leviticus 4:13 - 21

J.T. The brethren are aware that our subject at these readings this season is the kingdom of God. We have looked through Romans with the quest of understanding as to it, and at our last reading we had 1 Corinthians to see how the kingdom relates to the assembly. We looked at the earlier chapters, and it is suggested, as has been spoken of amongst us, that we should look at the second epistle to the Corinthians at this time. We can only be very cursory, for many books have yet to be looked into. At our last reading, as already remarked, we looked at the first letter to Corinth, and we were led to consider the matter of evidence in relation to assembly administrations-first, the evidence of the house of Chloe which reported that there was division among the saints in Corinth, chapter 1:11; and then in regard of chapter 5, the incestuous man whom Paul would have put away from among them. These two scriptures occupied most of our time, particularly because they had reference to current things amongst us. It was thought that the assembly was losing its place in administrative matters. The Lord helped at Corinth and the judicial action was carried out according to the apostle's direction, that in the power of our Lord Jesus Christ with Paul's spirit, and the Corinthians themselves in assembly, they should deliver the guilty man to Satan for the destruction of the flesh. Our present epistle shows that that judgment was carried out. Chapter 7, in the passage we read, shows how it was carried out. Verse 11 says, "For, behold, this same thing, your being grieved according to God, how much diligence it wrought in you, but what excusing of yourselves", meaning that they were ashamed of themselves because of the tolerance of evil amongst them, which now had been dealt with. Then

the apostle goes on, "But what indignation, but what fear, but what ardent desire, but what zeal, but what vengeance: in every way ye have proved yourselves to be pure in the matter". This shows, as was remarked, that the matter of judgment which was ordered by the apostle was carried out, and it would seem, with righteous severity. Now, what appears in our first scripture read, chapter 2:1 - 11, is that whilst they carried out the judgment rightly, they were failing in recognising the work of God in the man when it began to take effect. It is said in chapter 2:6, "Sufficient to such a one is this rebuke which has been inflicted by the many; so that on the contrary ye should rather shew grace and encourage, lest perhaps such a one should be swallowed up with excessive grief". It seems that there are important lessons for us in this, first, as to tolerance of evil; how serious it is, and yet at the same time the saints were puffed up while allowing it, according to what the apostle says in chapter 5 of the first letter; and then, after the discipline had become effective in bringing about repentance, the evidence of the work of God, the Corinthians were tardy in recognizing what God had effected. This is a matter of extreme importance for us; that we should not be slow in recognising the work of grace in whomsoever it may be.

J.T.Jr. Does the first verse of chapter 2 show how the apostle himself was feeling in regard to things? "But I have judged this with myself, not to come back to you in grief". That is, he was viewing the thing as it affected God and he was not going to act apart from that.

J.T. I suppose he had in mind that he would come back as a herald. He speaks of himself in his first letter to Timothy with this in mind, "For God is one, and the mediator of God and men one, the man Christ Jesus, who gave himself a ransom for all, the testimony to be rendered in its own times; to which I have been appointed

a herald and apostle, (I speak the truth, I do not lie,) a teacher of the nations in faith and truth", (1 Timothy 2:5 - 7). I suppose he would like to resume his service in that way at Corinth if he did come back; that he should not come back in grief which would tend to produce despondency, the very opposite of the effect of grace. I suppose he wished to come back in that way. Apparently that state of things had been brought about in his own soul, for he speaks of it in chapter 7, and it is important, I am sure, that we should, in approaching the saints, come in that way; that is, in buoyancy and power. I suppose that is what he had in mind, and therefore he, in order to pave the way, sent Timothy, a man like himself in spirit, who cared for the saints as to how they got on; whom, he says, he had sent to show them his ways, to set out his ways before them as they were in Christ.

A.R. Is that why Paul speaks so much about encouragement? He speaks about the God of encouragement.

J.T. Yes; I am sure it is an important thing that we should not be among the brethren, especially seeking to minister to them, in any gloomy or critical way. That cannot reflect the traits of the gospel.

R.W.S. Paul says in the first epistle, chapter 16:10, "Now if Timotheus come, see that he may be with you without fear; for he works the work of the Lord, even as I". Does that bear on what you have said as to Timothy being at Corinth and the instruction as to how they were to treat him, as possibly a timid man, as we have thought?

J.T. Yes. The same thing is seen in regard of Titus in (2 Corinthians 7:13), "For this reason we have been encouraged. And we the rather rejoiced in our encouragement more abundantly by reason of the joy of Titus, because his spirit has been refreshed by you all". And then again he says, "Because if I boasted to him anything about you, I have not been put to shame; but as we have spoken to you all things in truth, so also our boasting

to Titus has been the truth; and his affections are more abundantly towards you, calling to mind the obedience of you all, how with fear and trembling ye received him. I rejoice that in everything I am confident as to you". I thought that would correspond with what was said about Titus by Paul himself, that the spirit of buoyancy replaced the spirit of grief. The state at Corinth was an occasion for grief, but the occasion had passed, seeing the evil had been judged, so that there was joy in these ministers.

A.N.W. All that would be based upon the statement in chapter 2:7 -- that the brother who had been put away was liable to be swallowed up with excessive grief.

J.T. The occasion of it was the restoring effect of the work of God at Corinth. And I think what that suggests is that, outside of divine Persons, the work of God is morally the greatest thing we can think of. It will be said in the future, "What hath God wrought!" (Numbers 23:23). And if He is working in any of us, for restoration or anything else, it is most important to take notice of it -- in however small a measure. It is our business, as priests to God and to Christ, to take account of the work of God in each. It is the first thing we hear of as in the gospel. There is joy in heaven, we are told, over every repenting sinner.

A.A.T. Have you any idea how Paul could have got all this information about the man, because he was not at Corinth?

J.T. That came up at our last reading, and it reminds us of what was spoken of at that time, that the assembly has ears. The ears of the assembly are spoken of in (Acts 11:22) and, of course, these ears are of those who form the assembly, and they take in things that are interesting to God and further His work. Therefore Paul was informed as to the evil at Corinth; in fact what was evident at Corinth as regards the incestuous man was a matter of common report. We are not told who

circulated the report, but evidently it needed to be circulated was not taken account or rightly at Corinth. And so someone in the house of Chloe reported to the apostle that a state of division existed at Corinth; therefore, it would look as if the ears of the assembly should be alert for all such information.

J.A.P. Did Paul get any information from Titus, such as we were just speaking about?

J.T. No doubt he did. He speaks of him as if he did. He says, "Because if I boasted to him anything about you I have not been put to shame but as we have spoken to you all things in truth, so also our boasting to Titus has been the truth; and his affections are more abundantly towards you, calling to mind the obedience of you all, how with fear and trembling ye received him. I rejoice that in everything I am confident as to you".

A.B.P. Verse 7 gives us the actual facts It says concerning Titus, "Relating to us your ardent desire, your mourning, your zeal".

J.T. Quite so.

W.F.W. Going back to chapter 2:4, the apostle said, "For out of much tribulation and distress of heart I wrote to you, with many tears; not that ye maybe grieved, but that ye may know the love which I have very abundantly towards you". Evidently Paul greatly felt the evil and he was greatly concerned that they might get help in regard to it. He did not use his apostleship in the way of using a rod but he passed through the sorrow in his soul.

J.T. Quite so. That he refrained from using the rod is helpful; the apostle would tend to pave the way for his own coming in buoyancy and the liberty of the truth of Christianity.

C.N. Does Paul therefore suggest the authority that is in the kingdom and the reaction that it has on the assembly?

J.T. Yes. That is our subject. He speaks of going

about preaching the kingdom of God. It marked him, but the preaching is to be accompanied by the spirit of the kingdom. We are told that it is righteousness and peace and joy in the Holy Spirit.

W.F.K. This man had repented; grief according to God works repentance. They could not do anything with him until he had repented.

J.T. Just so; but when he does repent he is a subject for the work of God; in fact, it is the work of God that brings about repentance.

C.A.M. Are we to act under the authority and commandments that are in the kingdom, like the first epistle to the Corinthians? That is comparatively simple, but the apostle also feels for the repentant man. We seem to need a sort of sensitiveness for that.

J.T. That ought to mark the assembly. The assembly is the centre whence all the operations of God work out; the accompaniments that promote holy buoyancy and joy; joy in the Holy Spirit. It would certainly seem here with great significance that that is just what existed, and Paul was labouring to the end that it should be there; that it should not only be actually existent on earth, but that it should be there, that it should be at Corinth at this particular juncture. It was a critical juncture, and these two brothers, Timotheus and Titus clearly belonged to the dispensation and intended to be characterised by it as delegates of Paul; and so they would create conditions, you might say, at Corinth such as marked the apostle when he went there first. The Lord had told him that He had much people in that city and not to be afraid, that no one would set on him to hurt him; so that he had a free hand there during the first eighteen months of his stay, and now that he is coming back he is desirous that he should be in the same spirit, and it is evident that that should apply to us, that in all circumstances we should maintain the character of the dispensation.

A.P.T. He says, "... lest perhaps such a one should be swallowed up with excessive grief". That would hardly be an assembly feature, would it? To allow that condition to prevail would not be in keeping with the dispensation.

J.T. No. I heard of a remark of Mr. Stoney's that he would like to push a certain man into heaven so that he might breathe the atmosphere of the gospel. What is in mind in our chapter is that the assembly should afford heavenly conditions, buoyant conditions.

W.F.W. Kingdom truth leads up to that. The kingdom is corrective and that implies assembly features That is what the apostle had in view.

J.T. He was representative of heaven, really. He tells us in this epistle that he went up there. He was caught up to the third heaven and into paradise, as if God would fill us, as witnesses here in any little measure, with thoughts of heaven, which ought to be reflected in the assembly.

A.R. What about pushing a man into the assembly?

J.T. I would not like to inaugurate anything like violence, but the kingdom of heaven is taken by violence, the violent take it by force. That is not violence in the ordinary sense of the word; it is spiritual, as overcoming obstacles, so that the joy of heaven should be amongst us, and if there is a man that has been a subject of the work of God, if he has been adversely subject to anything else, we ought to be able to help him, and that is the point here. The apostle urges them to show grace. The word 'grace' apparently means to forgive him. It carries the thought of forgiveness.

R.W.S. Is there skill in Paul suggesting that if Timothy go to Corinth he be there without fear? With conditions as they were at Corinth, why send a Timothy?

J.T. I would think he was a timid man. One would gather that, and no doubt God takes account of what we are constitutionally, in a physical sense, in taking us up

for His service; and if a man is weakly and timid as evidently Timothy was, he might be more effective in the circumstances then current in the assembly at Corinth. An aggressive man might hinder the work. Sometimes special firmness is needed; going forward with what is right. Timothy was not a man of that kind, but still he was the kind that suited the service; a timid man that would give way to others for the moment, but yet would maintain the truth. Timothy was representative of Paul, especially in his ways; something that we hardly know now by experience -- the idea of apostolic representation. Timothy represented that class of ministry: one who represented the apostle in his ways; not only in his teaching, but in his ways; "my ways", he says, "as they are in Christ", (1 Corinthians 4:17).

A.N.W. Is it not necessary to see that in taking this course with the Corinthians he is not endeavouring to undo what they were told to do in 1 Corinthians 5 by saying that it was sufficient; but now it was time to receive him back?

J.T. Yes; because we may go beyond what should be done. Then another point that is important, I think, added to chapters 2 and 7, is that the types furnish the idea of the assembly needing correction; needing adjustment. Indeed the book of Leviticus affords the furnishings, positive and negative, that are needed for the service of God; reparation or correction of what is erroneous even though it be the assembly itself; even though it might be the high priest, or it might be a prince in Israel, coming down even to an ordinary brother or sister. Chapter 4 contemplates the need of a corrective offering being made by the assembly. God has furnished us with instruction so that the service should not be impaired by any lack on our part either in any undue severity or the want of grace; "sin through inadvertence against any of the commandments of Jehovah", verse 2. The defection arises from something done inadvertently.

That is, it was not wilful. A wilful sin in Leviticus is dealt with most summarily. In fact, Hebrews deals with that side, and Hebrews has to do with the service of God. Sin in Hebrews is apostasy. There is no forgiveness for that. But in Leviticus the sin is reckoned as inadvertence. The word is, as the brethren will notice, in Leviticus 4:13. "And if the whole assembly of Israel sin inadvertently". It is not regarded as a sin of will; a wilful sin, as it says in Hebrews, "For where we sin wilfully ...", chapter 10:26. There is no forgiveness for that. Here it is in advertence, therefore the door is open for correction. That correction implies that there is a judgment of the thing; although it was done inadvertently, yet it was sin nevertheless when it became known. When it becomes known it is sin, and it is dealt with as if the whole assembly were guilty of something, that is if somewhat is done against "any of all the commandments of Jehovah in things which should not be done, and are guilty". That is, the guilt is there nevertheless, although it was not done deliberately; and then the scripture directs that the elders of the assembly shall lay their hands on the head of the bullock before Jehovah. It says the bullock was to be a young one, and it was to be a sin-offering, and it was to be brought to the tent of meeting, "and the elders of the assembly shall lay their hands on the head of the bullock before Jehovah; and one shall slaughter the bullock before Jehovah. And the priest that is anointed shall bring of the bullock's blood into the tent of meeting; and the priest shall dip his finger in the blood, and sprinkle it seven times before Jehovah, before the veil; and he shall put of the blood on the horns of the altar that is before Jehovah which is in the tent of meeting; and he shall pour out all the blood at the bottom of the altar of burnt-offering, which is at the entrance of the tent of meeting. And all its fat shall he take off from it and bum on the altar. And he shall do with the bullock as he did with the bullock of

sin-offering: so shall he do with it. And the priest shall make atonement for them; and it shall be forgiven them", verses 15 - 20. That is the principle of forgiveness applied to the assembly. "And he shall carry forth the bullock outside the camp, and burn it as he burned the first bullock; it is a sin-offering of the congregation". That is, the blood of the offering is carried into the tabernacle and all such offerings are burned with fire without the camp, meaning they are serious before God. Not only have they offended each other, but they have offended the Lord: "... any of all the commandments of Jehovah". It is very gracious for God to provide this for us, because the types are for us. They are types for us in our dispensation. So that God has recourse to Himself to His own provision in grace; that in which He has come out in the gospel. He now comes out to repair -- to set us up again in the assembly -- so that the assembly should function; because the assembly is there abstractly even though there is error. The assembly is there abstractly, and God is ever ready to support it. In fact, the gates of Hades shall not prevail against it, showing it is abstractly kept in perfection, but nevertheless it is capable of sinning.

A.R. We should have an assembly conscience.

J.T. That is a good phrase. We are more ready to join in characteristics, perhaps, that are not marked by conscience. We are apt to join and hold to a line of things not marked by conscience, rather for justification of self, and to show that we are of one mind; whereas the assembly conscience will bar anything in the sense of special friendships, with special ability to be friendly with one another and to support one another.

W.F.W. What you have said as to a defective part in a machine is very instructive; something being defective in the assembly, so that it will not function properly. In the mind of God it is there and held there, but yet it is not functioning properly. You can take the most

expensive machine and if there is something wrong it will not function. The same thing applies to divine things.

J.T. It is well to use any line of things that we can apply illustratively. This matter of repair, the need of repair, and the power of repair to set things up as they used to be and should be is most important. Leviticus has that in mind.

C.A.M. In verse 15, which you just read, it refers to "the elders of the assembly", and in verse 16 it says, "the priest that is anointed". Would it be right to say that the elders of the assembly refer to some local element, whereas the priest that is anointed might be looked at as one that acted for God in a universal sense?

J.T. I think so. The priesthood is universal. The priests are not restricted to what is local any more than the Levites are. The elders of the assembly are always local. The term may be applied to the whole assembly or the whole nation of Israel, but in principle elders always, work locally and hence the elders of Ephesus, for instance, although by extension they may be regarded as the elders of the assembly, yet practically they are local at Ephesus. They are said to be made by the Spirit of God as overseers, not simply elders, but persons who look after things in an overseeing manner. And there is intelligence, there is ability to deal with things, because overseers should know; they know what is defective, and then they know how to repair, as we have seen.

J.A.P. Do we get help as to the priesthood in the incident when Phinehas took matters up for God? God said he was jealous for Him. Is that what is needed in these matters?

J.T. Just so; the priest thinks for God. Leviticus 8 says that the priests are to keep the charge of Jehovah, day and night seven days, verse 35, meaning the whole dispensation. God has allied Himself, as it were, with them in approaching men in relation to matters of

leprosy such as this, or any irregularity, such as the outbreak in Numbers 16, for example. In principle, the priests are always available to act for God.

W.R. Is Paul not setting up the saints in Corinth in the dignity of priesthood? He says in the beginning of chapter 7, "Having therefore these promises, beloved, let us purify ourselves from every pollution of flesh and spirit, perfecting holiness in God's fear", verse 1.

J.T. Just so.

R.W.S. In verse 13, something has been hid from the eyes of the congregation, but when the thing becomes known then the congregation shall present a young bullock. It does not say the assembly; it is the congregation. What is the difference?

J.T. Footnotes to Exodus 12, verses 3 and 6, New Translation, give instruction as to the use of the two words. 'Assembly is the congregation looked at as a moral whole, a corporate person before God'. 'Congregation is the actual subsisting congregation composed of all its members'.

W.F.K. Should there be assembly repentance before adjustments are met?

J.T. There should be.

W.F.K. How does that work out?

J.T. Leviticus 4, which we have been considering, indicates this. We also have instruction in Revelation. The seven assemblies are viewed as in responsibility, and, having failed, the Lord directs them to repent and do the first works, chapter 2:4,5; not only the actual repentance is required but the things that are needed should be done to set the matter right.

W.F.K. If this was not done the Lord could not be with the assembly.

J.T. He could not.

F.S.C. There is a word in (2 Corinthians 7:9), "Now I rejoice, not that ye have been grieved, but that ye have been grieved to repentance; for ye have been grieved

according to God, that in nothing ye might be injured by us. For grief according to God works repentance to salvation, never to be regretted; but the grief of the world works death". Is that assembly repentance?

J.T. It is indeed. God has made provision in the types for us, and we see how the Lord carried out the same principle in writing to the seven churches; all is for us. "Now all these things happened to them as types, and have been written for our admonition, upon whom the ends of the ages are come", (1 Corinthians 10:11). So we are to take on what was written, and if it applies at a given time we should apply it. Why should there be a defect? God says, I do not want you to be at any disadvantage; I do not want to charge you with wilful sin. God is not wishing to place us beyond recovery; He is wishing to keep us within the range of recovery where grace is; where He is Himself. Hence, why not use it? And in order to use it, to set ourselves in the position to use it; that is, owning the thing that has been done. However ignorantly done, yet it is done and should be corrected and acknowledged not only to one another but to God.

A.R. Is that a local repentance? How do you-look at the repentance in Corinth?

J.T. There should be an acknowledgment to God. Only the other day I had a word about that in a letter from a certain place where an action had been taken several years ago and now it is found to be wrong, and the brethren are concerned how to deal with it, and clearly Leviticus 4:13 - 21 is the way: to acknowledge it before God according to the instruction furnished. A young bullock is offered for a sin-offering, meaning that God is looking for the best in the way of acknowledgments.

A.P.T. In regard to the word our brother quoted from (2 Corinthians 7:10), "never to be regretted". Does that fit in with the assembly side?

J.T. That is a good word. The assembly is not to

live in regrets. We are not to live in regrets in heaven, I am certain; nor are we to live in regrets here either. The matter is made clear and the assembly conscience made perfect through the sin offering; it sets us up again as free from the stain.

J.S. Is that to bring about buoyancy again in the assembly?

J.T. Just so. God is counting on us to represent Him here, and if we are not buoyant, rejoicing, we cannot represent God. The Spirit of God is here; hence it is joy in the Holy Spirit; that is a characteristic of the kingdom.

C.N. So that the elders laying their hands on the head of the bullock would be taking on the thing, and the action of the priests would be the atonement made for it, so that, as you say, the whole position is clear.

J.T. Quite so. They are God's priests; as if He were to arm Himself with them so that His rights are maintained. And as we have often remarked, Leviticus always speaks of the priests as available.

A.R. In what way can a local assembly sin today.

J.T. We cannot get any better example than the one we have before us. They were puffed up about the wickedness amongst them; and they did not deal with it; then after they dealt with it they were slow in showing grace; although grace reigns; it is the dispensation of the grace of God.

J.T.Jr. Would not verse 2 of the chapter in Leviticus amplify what our brother has brought up? It says, ".. any of the commandments of Jehovah"; that is, even one commandment. Matthew and Corinthians would be the law of the house. It would be a violation of any one commandment; even one.

J.T. Therefore the word in 1 Corinthians 14:37 is very significant, "If any one thinks himself to be a prophet or spiritual ..." -- he would recognise that what Paul wrote was the commandment of the Lord. Hence John's

gospel says, "He that has my commandments and keeps them, he it is that loves me", (John 14:21).

R.W.S. Elders are not mentioned at Corinth. I was wondering if there was some reflection upon the elders there m connection with the assembly sinning.

J.T. There may be that. The Lord is helping us in having recourse to care meetings, admitting all the brethren, old and young; for why should we not be careful about the things of the Lord. A care meeting ought to be marked by the application of the principles that God has ordained for the government of His house; administrative principles. I do not know that we are weaker m anything than we are in administrative principles. It is painful to see the violation of some of them often allowed to pass.

W.W.M. Would you say something about the work of God that was mentioned at the beginning? Is it your thought that we are to value that work and promote it even though for the moment we may be hindered by something in the person in whom it is? The work of God is always to be valued. Moses says, "Make us glad according to the days wherein thou hast afflicted us, according to the years wherein we have seen evil. Let thy work appear unto thy servants, and thy majesty unto their sons. And let the beauty of Jehovah our God be upon us; and establish thou the work of our hands upon us: yea, the work of our hands, establish thou it", (Psalm 90:15 - 17).

J.T. That bears much on what is before us. It is he that writes later, "What hath God wrought!" And what comes up in relation to that is the preciousness of the work, such as Bezaleel and Aholiab wrought, including the use of precious stones. The most precious things were employed. The epistle to the Philippians corresponds, as stressing the excellence of the work of God in Christianity. To them the apostle says, "And this I pray, that your love may abound yet more and more in full

knowledge and all intelligence, that ye may judge of and approve the things that are more excellent", chapter 1:9,10. In the breastplate of the high priest, each tribe is represented by a precious stone; not only the name of the tribe but by the precious stone, as if we should know the value of the precious stone and say. That is Judah; that is Benjamin; so that we know how to value one another. We are apt to think of each other very crudely and even as together by dint of circumstances, ordinary external circumstances, whereas God's work brings us together in affection. Hence, as we see one who is the subject of the work of God, whether it be Judah or Benjamin, we recognise him. We know him by the precious stone. "To you therefore who believe is the preciousness", (1 Peter 2:7). Peter uses that word, and so he speaks about the precious blood of Christ as of a lamb without blemish and without spot. The foundational position is in that, and hence the precious stones in the heavenly city. In the book of Revelation each foundation of the city is adorned by a precious stone.

C.F.E. The priest is spoken of much in Leviticus 4. Does he take on the sin of the whole assembly?

J.T. Yes, he officiates in all the cases mentioned. Indeed, he himself is one of them. The first one mentioned is the priest, showing how all, outside of divine Persons, are liable to be defective. This type, however, contemplates complete adjustment as also does the first epistle to the Corinthians as to the man put away. The apostle, while ordering the man to be excommunicated, to purge out the old leaven says at the same time, "according as ye are unleavened". Thus while the assembly is capable of being leavened by the conduct of one of its members, viewed abstractly it is unleavened.

J.A.P. Does assembly sin oftentimes begin with the sin of a person? The chapter in Leviticus which we are considering begins with the sin of a soul. I was thinking of what Paul said to the Corinthians: "A little leaven

leavens the whole lump". Is that the way matters begin?

J.T. Yes; "a little leaven". The abstract idea of which we have spoken is important and ought to be always before us. The apostle says, "Purge out the old leaven, that ye may be a new lump", (1 Corinthians 5:7). That is what we are speaking about. He further says, "... according as ye are unleavened". On that basis we start over again. It is a foundational thought of the assembly. That is the work of God, and the work of God is in keeping with the cost at which the assembly is secured for God. It is purchased with the precious blood of Christ. Paul says to the Ephesian elders, "Shepherd the assembly of God, which he has purchased with the blood of his own" (Acts 20:28) with notes.

W.F.W. From chapter 13 you were going to bring before us other things bearing on what is before us.

J.T. It was only to bring out from the chapters immediately preceding what is always present; that those whom God is using in His service are always objects of attack. The anointing always brings out the attack of the enemy. It comes out particularly in this second epistle to the Corinthians; Paul's adversaries -- because he had them. He would say, no doubt, in his inmost heart, I am sorry for them, but I have them. He singles out a certain one among them, a rival, no doubt saying, "His letters, he says, are weighty and strong, but his presence in the body weak, and his speech naught", (2 Corinthians 10:10). That is, Paul can write a good letter, he would say, no doubt. "But his presence in the body weak, and his speech naught". That is the character of the attack. Those who are rivals will say discreditable things of those who are seeking to set out the truth as it should be. God has furnished many of His servants who are able to do this and we ought to have it before us that they are to be protected because the enemy is specially against them and that is the thing that works out in the

end of this epistle; Satan's emissaries were there and they were attacking Paul, and Paul says I am a fool to talk about myself in talking about them, but ye have compelled me, chapter 12:11. We force the brother or brothers whom God may be using in His service to speak of themselves; they may have to speak of themselves but they are fools in doing it, and they feel that. They would rather others would do it and others should do it. And so when the apostle comes down to the last chapter of the epistle, he comes to this point as to himself. He speaks about two or three witnesses, alluding to the fact that he had promised to come and was coming. They would say. He does not mean it; he is not exactly truthful about it; but he was truthful about it and he wanted them to know that he was truthful. Now he says, "I have declared beforehand, and I say beforehand as present the second time, and now absent, to those that have sinned before, and to all the rest, that if I come again I will not spare. Since ye seek a proof of Christ speaking in me, (who is not weak towards you, but is powerful among you, for if indeed he has been crucified in weakness, yet he lives by God's power; for indeed we are weak in him, but we shall live with him by God's power towards you,)" verses 2 - 4. That is the confidence the apostle has. "Examine your own selves if ye be in the faith; prove your own selves: do ye not recognise yourselves, that Jesus Christ is in you, unless indeed ye be reprobates? Now I hope that ye will know that we are not reprobates", verses 5, 6. Someone there might suggest that terrible thing; no doubt that is implied. "But we pray to God that ye may do nothing evil; not that we may appear approved, but that ye may do what is right, and we be as reprobates. For we can do nothing against the truth, but for the truth. For we rejoice when we may be weak and ye may be powerful. But this also we pray for, your perfecting. On this account I write these things being absent, that being

present I may not use severity according to the authority which the Lord has given me for building up, and not for overthrowing", verses 7 - 10. I thought we should finish with that as bearing, not on the priesthood exactly, but on those whom God has set in the assembly according to the first epistle, to announce the truth and administer divine principles among the brethren.

A.B.P. Is there a link between this and Leviticus 4 in the fact that the person who is not designated other than by the word 'one', who steps forward in the acceptance of the position and takes the lead to slaughter the bullock, may be outwardly expressing weakness in doing so?

J.T. Let us read the note to verse 15: 'The expression "ones hall slaughter" has interest in respect of the point where self-offering and mediatorial work begins. It was not the priest who slaughtered, unless he were the guilty one (verse 4), and then it is not as priest. I do not know that it is more precise in verses 4 and 24'. And in the chapter, verse 24, which is referred to, reads, "And he shall lay his hand on the head of the goat, and slaughter it at the place where they slaughter the burnt-offering before Jehovah: it is a sin-offering". Whether there is any point of weakness, I do not know, but the word 'one' would point to the fact that the thing had to be done. It might appear in other connections that the priest should do it, but the word "one shall slaughter the bullock before Jehovah" would mean that it had to be done. What was said about Ananias and Sapphira comes into one's mind. The burial had to take place and one of the young men did it. I do not know whether much can be said as to weakness.

A.B.P. I was thinking of it in the light of the weakness which Paul would attribute to himself in the verses we read. He seems to be prepared to be so regarded. Naturally speaking, it is weakness to admit error. Spiritually it is really power, is it not?

J.T. It is indeed power. I mean to say, you often

see it, that it needs courage, where a thing has been done that is not right, to say it is wrong; to say it outright; to call it by its right name.

W.R. Does Paul bring himself forward in that way as having parental authority over the saints? He says in verse 14 of the preceding chapter, "Behold, this third time I am ready to come to you, and I will not be in laziness a charge; for I do not seek yours, but you; for the children ought not to lay up for the parents, but the parents for the children", verse 14. Is that the thought, that Paul would desire in his activity among the saints to "lay up" something for them that could be carried forward to the glory of God?

J.T. He became a father to them. They did not have many, he said; they did not have many fathers. They had many teachers, and he acted towards them as his children, laying things up for them. He would work with his hands so as not to be a charge to them.

R.W. S. Would the gain of all this accrue in Corinth, according to the last verse of the epistle? "The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the communion of the Holy Spirit, be with you all", verse 14. Is that the gain accruing from taking up issues and facing them -- having this rich heritage?

J.T. Just so; the Father, the Son and the Spirit are brought in there; certainly involving a very strong position in that sense. "The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the communion of the Holy Spirit, be with you all". I think you have already said that the elders are not mentioned. It is all the saints -- the whole assembly -- in evidence in Corinth. When we come to the actual official side, in the first epistle, we have "So also is the Christ", the body is set out in that way, the Christ being expressed in the assembly as anointed. It is an anointed vessel here below in power to maintain for God on earth.

J.S. Does the apostle show how skilful he was?

J.T. Well, I am sure he does. That would link up with what we have already alluded to in Exodus: the skill of the workers in the tabernacle, especially the two leading workers, Bezaleel and Aholiab. That marked Paul. He was a wise architect; in building he knew just what to do.

W.F.K. Do you think those who form an assembly can be too severe and thus damage the building? I was thinking of verse 10 of our chapter. "That I may not use severity according to the authority which the Lord has given me". I was thinking of the building up.

J.T. That is specially important at the present time. It is a beautiful ending in such an epistle, especially as followed by the salutations, bringing in the whole Godhead. It fits particularly in an assembly to which Paul is regarded as a father; not only an apostle, but a father A father would be severe, if necessary, but characteristically a father works in love. He addressed the Corinthians as a father. "My beloved children", he says, "I admonish you", (1 Corinthians 4:14).

J.T.Jr. Would verse 5 of this last chapter bring them back to chapter 11 of the first epistle examining and (proving) Really, you could hardly take the Supper without this; that is, where there is unjudged sin-examining and proving would lead you to judge it.

J.T. That is what you get here. "Examine your own selves if ye be in the faith; prove your own selves" Whether we are in the dispensation characteristically, is meant. We are to examine ourselves, and in chapter 11 it is, "and thus eat". How can we answer to this chapter unless we are fed with right food?

THE KINGDOM OF GOD (6)

John 3:3 - 11; Luke 4:42 - 44; Luke 6:20; Luke 8:1 - 3

J.T. We have been looking into the epistles in our consideration of the kingdom of God, which is the subject before us, and it is now thought that we should turn to the gospels as confirmatory of the teaching of the epistles. The kingdom of God is formally treated of in Mark, Luke and John, whereas the kingdom of the heavens is treated of only in the gospel of Matthew; so it is thought that we should leave this latter phase of our subject for a later period; that we should first look at the two or three instances in which the kingdom is found in John and then go on to Luke. The verses in John 3, which have been read, are, we may say, the only ones, which treat of the kingdom of God in this gospel, and should be looked at attentively. John only of all the evangelists treats of this subject basically, reminding us that the kingdom is only seen and entered into by those who are born again; although it may be outwardly entered, yet only those who are born anew are really in it. Luke, in chapter 6: 20, points out the persons who possess the kingdom. He says the poor have it. John says that only those that are born again have it. Of course, Luke is not setting this aside, but stresses the effect of new birth in a characteristic way; that they are poor in this world, not only in material things, but as refusing to be other than poor as in this world, poor in spirit, as Matthew records the Lord as saying. And then in chapter 8 Luke gives us persons who are characteristically of the kingdom as delivered from Satan's power. It is said that the Lord "went through the country city by city, and village by village, preaching and announcing the glad tidings of the kingdom of God; and the twelve were with him, and certain women who had been healed of wicked spirits and infirmities, Mary who was called Magdalene, from whom

seven demons had gone out, and Joanna, wife of Chuza, Herod's steward, and Susanna, and many others, who ministered to him of their substance", Luke 8:1 - 3. It is thought that this should be reserved for the closing part of our reading as showing the kind of people who are in the kingdom, who have been affected by it, especially a person out of whom seven demons had gone. They were with the Lord and ministered to Him of their substance.

C.A.M. Do you look at that as the result of what takes place in John 3 where we get the very beginnings of our moral history?

J.T. I would say so; and then the effects worked out from the basic thought of new birth. It would seem as if it is suitable that John should treat of it in this way. It is applicable to the last days; that is, to our own times, because, as is usual in his way of presenting the truth, he would stress what is basic; not simply what is external, or what is professedly held, but basically held, and therefore will survive and go through.

C.A.M. Is that why he stresses this matter of birth? I wanted to ask you whether being born of water brings us to the meaning of the death of Christ at the very beginning. The water represents the moral side of the death of Christ in connection with the believer's beginning. Is that how you look at it?

J.T. Yes. It is the element of cleansing.

C.A.M. It was just that matter I specially wanted to ask you about. Do you regard the aspect of the death of Christ in connection with the blood as the judicial matter, and the water the cleansing?

J.T. Well, inasmuch as one is said to be born of it, the water would be there basically. It is the element of cleansing, not the element of refreshment, as running with the idea of new birth, because the word in verse 5 is, "born of water and of Spirit". It is as if, in this second reference, the Lord would impress us with the

element of cleansing, by putting the water first. The first reference is, "Except any one be born anew he cannot see the kingdom of God". That is, you might say, the most elementary reference to genuineness in the matter; and then the second reference brings in the element of cleansing, being an extension of the first as necessary to entering into the kingdom; as if the seeing is not so important as the entrance into it. Entrance into it implies moral cleansing, somewhat in keeping with Titus -- "the washing of regeneration and renewal of the Holy Spirit". That would be a further thought of John 3, only it is a carrying on of the truth. It is a continuation of the thing to the full thought of Christianity, the washing of regeneration and the renewal of the Holy Spirit; as if it were on full Christian ground in that reference. John 3 gives us basic things which indicate that we are genuine; not only to say things but to move into them and to appropriate them.

H.O.E. Would the Lord's words in chapter 13 bear on this? He said, "He that is washed all over needs not to wash save his feet, but is wholly clean".

J.T. Yes. They express a full thought. "Washed all over" is the idea of a bath, as over against the mere feet-washing.

W.F.K. Is new birth a sovereign act of God?

J.T. It is. One cannot effect it himself, clearly. It is God's action, but yet we cannot omit the moral results which bring in exercise with men; those who are to share in it.

T.E.H. Would you help as to entrance into the kingdom? We do not see the king, but a sphere where the king has dominion. Is that right?

J.T. Yes. God has come in. The Lord had said, for instance, in Luke, and in Luke only, "The kingdom of God is in the midst of you", Luke 17:21. Generally, it is viewed as coming, or about to happen, but Luke stresses that it was here when the Lord was here,

whereas Paul's ministry would say it is here because the Spirit is present. It is a question of the Spirit.

A.R. Is that the idea of being born of the Spirit? You must be spiritual to see the kingdom.

J.T. That is the first point for us to lay hold of at this time -- the action of God in new birth. It gives us ability to see; as if the eyes are opened to see this thing without seeing anything more for the moment. There is power to see it, and the fact that the Lord alludes to it would mean that it existed as He spoke.

A.A.T. Would that apply to Old Testament times?

J.T. I do not think they are in mind. It is a question of the changes that came about through the Lord coming in. For instance. He says, "But from the days of John the Baptist until now, the kingdom of the heavens is taken by violence, and the violent seize on it", (Matthew 11:12). He had spoken of John the Baptist as the greatest of those born of women, but He says that a little one in the kingdom of the heavens is greater than he. That would mean that it is not in Old Testament times, nor even in John's time. Whilst John the Baptist laboured and spoke of it, yet it was something coming. The kingdom of heaven, he said, was at hand; whereas in the Old Testament it was not there at all. It was the kingdom of David or the kingdom of Israel, but the kingdom of God depended on God coming in, and from the moment Jesus began to minister, in Luke, it was there. He said, according to chapter 4:43, "I must needs announce the glad tidings of the kingdom of God to the other cities also, for for this I have been sent forth. And he was preaching in the synagogues of Galilee". The word here apparently is the idea of evangelising the kingdom. The Lord in Luke is saying that the thing exists; it is evangelised. It is a great matter; not simply that it was coming, but it was there.

A.A.T. Does Luke 17 help in relation to John 3? When the Pharisees asked the Lord about the kingdom of

God coming, He said, "The kingdom of God does not come with observation", (Luke 17:20). Would that be indicative of the fact that they were not born anew and could not take it in? He says, "The kingdom of God is in the midst of you", and then turns to the disciples. They were apparently aware of the position.

J.T. Quite so. They did not accept or understand the great fact that had come about by the incarnation. The Lord said, "The kingdom of God is in the midst of you", but it did not come in an outward way, like the kingdom of David, or any outward matter that will take place in the millennium. It is a thing to be observed by the Spirit, by persons born again. It comes not with observation; that is, the natural man does not see it. He may see certain effects, signs and the like, but he does not see the moral side at all. It is a question of having his eyes opened to see it.

A.B.P. Is there a connection between John 3 and Luke 9? The Lord says, "There are some of those standing here who shall not taste death until they shall have seen the kingdom of God", verse 27.

J.T. That is important. I was thinking of reserving that, but it is important to get the full thought. That was the kingdom, as you might say, literally, as it will be in the millennium. What they saw on the mount of transfiguration was what will be displayed publicly presently, and they saw it really in the sense in which it will be displayed. John 3 deals with the moral side of the matter, that one cannot see it unless he is born again, and that shuts out millions who might profess to be in the kingdom, but are not born again.

A.R. Where do you see it today?

J.T. It is a question of the Holy Spirit, as it was here in the Lord's time; but at that time He was not in the saints as Christ was not yet glorified. Still, the kingdom was here in virtue of divine Persons being here; the Son and the Spirit being on earth; thus God was here. It is

really the kingdom of God. Now, redemption accomplished, the Son is in heaven and the Holy Spirit is here in the assembly and hence the kingdom of God is here. So that the kingdom of God, as we have already seen, is righteousness, peace and joy in the Holy Spirit; therefore, anyone who sees it sees it in relation to the Lord's people, where the Spirit is.

D.P. Why is the blood not mentioned?

J.T. The Spirit and the water are mentioned; not the blood; but for redemption the blood is needed. It is implied in verse 14 in the uplifted Son of man. Eternal life could not otherwise be given to the believer. The earlier teaching of the chapter leads up to this. Verses 14 - 16 present redemption through the death of Christ and the consequent gift of eternal life -- all testifying to the great love of God. Thus the chapter treats of the death of Christ, because the Lord says, "And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, thus must the Son of man be lifted up", (John 3:14). That is, the lifting up of the serpent in the wilderness really refers to the Lord's death; the water also does, but not in the full judicial sense. In the early part of the chapter what is stressed is the new birth -- a great practical necessity. It is a basic subjective result in man effected by the Holy Spirit. In view of what the presence and work of Christ on earth brought out (which the Lord knew, chapter 2:23 - 25) the new birth was an absolute necessity to the accomplishment of the counsels of God as to man.

R.W.S. Would the allusion to the wind suggest that there is a certain current in which the Holy Spirit is operating? And would the meetings afford such a current so that a person there might come under the observation of the Holy Spirit and be born again; more so than being out in the world?

J.T. You are making a point of being at the meetings?

R.W.S. Yes. If the Spirit is free in a meeting would there not be something, in that sense, which is not found

elsewhere? The passage alludes to the wind blowing where it will, and then it says, "thus is every one that is born of the Spirit", verse 8.

J.T. I would say that fully; therefore the importance of keeping in touch with Christians. Of course, the Spirit operates sovereignty, because the wind blows where it lists; "thus is every one that is born of the Spirit". Well, that is quite likely to take place where the Spirit of God is known to be. It is a great matter to keep before us, that the Spirit of God is here on earth, and it is known where He is. He is not in the wind. It is known where He is; He is in the assembly. The Spirit came to where the disciples were; where they were assembled. Acts 2:1 - 2.

T.E.H. He hovered over the face of the waters, and then God said, "Let there be light". Is the latter the result of hovering?

J.T. That is a good way of treating that passage. The Spirit was there. We do not know how long He hovered there. The earth was waste. Some hand had done it; had created a chaotic condition. But the Spirit is there, nevertheless, to effect something which is seen throughout the first chapter of Genesis.

H.O.E. Would you say that the Spirit is now in the saints preserving and producing the features of the kingdom?

J.T. Yes. Hence the importance of keeping where the brethren are, because normally they are where the Spirit is. He came to the brethren, as we have noted, and the effect was seen immediately.

A.R. The sound was "as of a violent impetuous blowing". It was God really.

J.T. You might say, speaking reverently, the inwards of God were implied, for it was a question of breathing. It was not as in John 3; the word there is not breathing. But in Acts 2 it was a hard breathing. Thus God signalises the great occasion of the incoming of the

Spirit. His affections were involved in men receiving His Spirit; and therefore the assembly is essential to the presence of the Spirit now. His dwelling here is in the saints.

J.T.Jr. While Peter was speaking to Cornelius and his company the Spirit fell on those who were hearing the word. Acts 10:44. Does not the hearing involve attention? Would not our meetings be better if our attention were better?

J.T. Quite so. Hearing is most important. The action of the Spirit in effecting new birth is mysterious, but, still, it is there, and the Lord intended to convey that. "Thou hearest its voice, but knowest not whence it comes and where it goes: thus is every one that is born of the Spirit". But it is a unified action; I mean, it is unified in the person involved, not affecting simply one part of him. The person is affected throughout by the action.

W.R. Do you think then that the three thousand souls added at Pentecost would get the gain of this?

J.T. They would. They were genuine. The chapter shows they were genuine cases. They continued, we are told, in the apostles' teaching and fellowship, in breaking of bread and prayers. They were so real and pleasing to the Lord that He was free to add others to them, they too being genuine.

J.A.P. Was the eunuch, prior to being spoken to by Philip, a subject of new birth as we speak of it? He was reading the Scriptures.

J.T. He might have been affected before. You cannot just say that he was not. Nicodemus undoubtedly was affected before, which would show that the Spirit was working, effecting new birth in men during the time of the Lord's ministry on earth. The Spirit was then operating on this principle, the Lord Himself being the Object in connection with whom the Spirit was working.

R.W.S. Was the Lord doing the work then, and is the Spirit Himself doing it now?

J.T. Well, the Spirit was doing it then too, when the Lord was here, because the Spirit was here in some sense from the outset. What is said in Genesis 1 would indicate He was here in some sense all the time. He was striving with men even after that, and is still doing so. We are now considering divine Persons. We have already been saying that the kingdom is in relation to the assembly now, or to the Spirit in the assembly. The Spirit is, however, sovereign, and a man might be born anew out in the ocean, or elsewhere, without relation to persons.

A.R. I know when I was converted, but I cannot tell when I was born again. Why is that?

J.T. Well, what you call your conversion may have included new birth. God can act instantaneously both in regard to new birth and conversion. One could bring forward illustrations of what happens; how the Spirit may act instantaneously in one, so that he is affected, though it may not be in the sense of being converted. Something has happened and if the man is normal he is sensible of it. When the Spirit's action in new birth takes place in one he is sure to be affected.

C.N. Does the idea of being born of water prove that there is a moral correspondence in the person in whom the Spirit has wrought?

J.T. I think the moral idea must be there in some sense, even in the first action, because it is an action depending on something. The man is actually affected. "Except any one be born anew ..." It is an action of God, but it is not in the air. It is in a man. It is not in a cow or any other such creature; not in an angel. It is always in a man. It is a human being that is born anew.

W.F.K. Do you think the thief on the cross was born again?

J.T. He certainly was. He said, "Remember me,

Lord, when thou comest in thy kingdom", (Luke 23:42). He saw there was a King there and, we may say, a kingdom also. There was a King there and he anticipated the Lord coming in His kingdom. Undoubtedly he was born anew for he saw the King and apprehended that He had a kingdom.

C.A.M. Would you say that the expression "born of water" would be the commencement of a man's moral being? It is not the same as washing one's robes. It would not be the same, for instance, as the cleansing of the leper, or other cleansings like Numbers 19. Does it not refer to the beginning of a man's spiritual history?

J.T. Quite so. The washing is not what we call judicial. It is a subjective thing. The blood effects judicial cleansing. That is, it implies that the Lord Jesus has been into death; that there has been death, and the word here conveys just the initial thought of cleansing. The Lord had not died yet, but He implies that there is such a thing as this -- a man being morally affected in the sense of cleansing. He would speak of things differently from this point of view; he is different; he would speak of things in a holy way from the start.

G.B.L. Does Leviticus 12 serve as a type to show that cleansing is connected with birth? When a child is born cleansing is required in the type.

J.T. Yes. Sixty-six days were required for a female child for the full cleansing of the mother, and thirty-three days for the male child; so that there is something there to remind us that the incoming into this world, whether it is a male or female, involves defilement; the female involves more pollution naturally than the male, if the brethren are able to follow that. It would mean much as to the condition of the human race in this world, and the polluted condition that is in the race, and how this idea of cleansing must take place. So that the first reference -- the eyes being opened to see the kingdom -- is not enough. There must be a movement, definite

movement, which means that I leave certain things behind.

A.A.T. Is the man in John 9 a sample of what we are speaking of? He was born blind, but got the movement you are speaking of afterwards.

J.T. Yes. He would illustrate the idea of being born anew and how it works up to full faith in Christ, so that the idea of being born anew is just an initial thought. The believer is not yet fully on the ground of redemption. It is the initial idea, whereas John 9 shows that the man steadily progressed. The Lord waited until he had been cast out of the synagogue, and then He says to him, "Thou, dost thou believe on the Son of God?" That is the next thing; what you believe after you have been born anew.

W.R. What is according to the old nature cannot be reformed or improved. Is that why the Lord Jesus speaks the second time, "Except any one be born anew"?

J.T. It means that Nicodemus who, from the Jewish standpoint, was, perhaps, the best man you could find, and was undoubtedly born anew, had need of this new thing. Whatever we may be religiously, we need this new thing. It says, "Except any one". The number of occurrences of the word "verily" in this section is remarkable. There are about twenty-four of them in John, but they are very strong here in emphasizing the necessity of the new birth. It is a real truth, an essential truth, and without it there is no Christianity at all.

H.O.E. Does the manifestation of the works of God in John 9 include the work of the Spirit initially in the opening of the blind man's eyes?

J.T. Just so. It is one of the most remarkable passages, because the man is not regarded as a sinner himself. I mean, he is not regarded as having sinned himself, nor his father; showing that God is regarding the man as just existing to bring out His works; that the works of God should be manifested in him. It is not the

work, but the works. The first work would be new birth, and that may have synchronised with what happened as the Lord took him up. The man did not ask Him to do it. The Lord spat on the ground and made mud of the spittle and put the mud on his eyes, anointing him with it, and told him to go to Siloam and wash. Much had to be done. The man had to find his way to Siloam. He was still blind, and if possible, blinder than before; but how did he get to Siloam? That is what the mind must follow. How did he get there? But he said that he was sent. The meaning of the word Siloam is. Sent. The moral element is in the fact that he was sent, and he obeyed the commandment, "Go, wash in the pool of Siloam". I would say, that is where new birth is seen. The man is entirely subject and does what he is told to do in order to be healed. It is the same sense in which any person has the obedience of faith; he is a witness to new birth; as he submits to the word of Christ one evidences new birth; so this man went to Siloam. That is the point he makes in speaking of it. The neighbours inquired of him, and he said that having gone and washed, he saw. That is historical, what he said to the neighbours. To the Pharisees, later, he says, "I washed, and I see". The point he makes is that he sees. He says in effect, if you examine me you will observe that I see.

R.W.S. Would you have the assurance that if a person is born again, the Spirit of God will follow that work up, or might it just be left as we see it in John 3?

J.T. Nicodemus was long in coming to the full bearing of the truth. The fact is that we must always note a distinction between him and the rest of the people around. It says. But -- "But there was a man from among the Pharisees". There is an adversative force in that phrase in favour of him. So he is not left. What was in him is pursued. He says, "We know that thou art come a teacher from God, for none can do these signs that thou doest unless God be with him", verse 2.

That is clear evidence that there is some sight in him: he saw that God was with Jesus. That indicates how the Spirit of God would follow up one born anew. The Spirit of God effects the change Himself and He follows on it with an evangelist, I would say. Nicodemus identifies himself with the Lord at His burial, John 19.

A.R. He came with one hundred pounds of myrrh and aloes to the Lord's burial. That shows he was genuine.

J.T. It did indeed, but he stayed a long time with the council, and that is another matter that we have to consider; that new birth may take place and yet a man may remain in worldly associations for a good while. Hence there is the need for a clear gospel being presented when there is any such case as Nicodemus; to present the true gospel; a separative gospel. The man in John 9 had the truth in that sense; in fact, he testified it himself. They cast him out, and that made him fit for something else; namely, believing on the Son of God.

D.P. Is the effect of new birth, in principle, to be seen in Naaman the Syrian?

J.T. Well, I would say he must have been a subject of the work of God before the Spirit of God calls attention to him, 2 Kings 5. God had used him; God had given deliverance to Syria through him. Why should that be stated there? And why should it be that he was a leper if it does not suggest that God takes up men who are ready to receive the gospel to work in them sovereignly by His Spirit? In this case the evangelist was a little maid. Naaman was already a subject of God's work; but it is proceeding. The matter is proceeding, and so the maid is affected by his case. She says, "Oh, would that my lord were before the prophet that is in Samaria! then he would cure him of his leprosy", (2 Kings 5:3). She was the evangelist, and that is what I think the Lord would tell us now -- to be urgent about need. If there are people around who seem to be interested; who indicate desire to be helped; who are the

subjects of the work of God, we should show that we are concerned about them. In the case of Naaman, the king of Syria took the matter up, which would indicate how the enemy is ready to interfere with the work of God, because Naaman was sent to the wrong man; he was sent to the king of Israel. The little maid did not say any-I thing about him; she spoke of the prophet in Samaria; that he would cure Naaman of his leprosy. The point is to be sure when instructing people as to the gospel, to send them to the right person.

Question. The man in John 5 does not seem to be able to say very much. He did not know who it was that healed him.

J.T. He is hardly a type of a convert. He caused the Lord persecution. Still, he was the subject of the sign, a testimony of the Lord's outward work. The Lord did not seem to have confidence in him, for He says, "Sin no more, that something worse do not happen to thee", (John 5:14). That implies that he is not to be trusted.

T.E.H. Isaiah was very desirous of seeing the result of the work of God. He says, "Who hath believed our report? and to whom hath the arm of Jehovah been revealed?" chapter 53:1.

W.R. Should we be energetic to seek out others to bring them into what we have of the light of the assembly and of the kingdom of God?

J.T. Just so; these cases that have been mentioned -- Naaman, the man in John 9, and Nicodemus -- all point to persons who are subjects of God's sovereign work. Now having proceeded so far in John, we should touch on Luke 4 to show how the proclamation of the kingdom goes with what we have been saying as to John. New birth is the sovereign, direct work of the Spirit. The passage in Luke 4 which has been read is the first one that mentions the subject of the kingdom of God in this gospel, but we should remember that Luke mentions that the angel told Mary that the Lord would have a great

and everlasting kingdom, chapter 1:32,33. But the verses in chapter 4 refer to the evangelisation of the kingdom of God. It says in verses 42 - 44, "And when it was day he went out, and went into a desert place, and the crowds sought after him, and came up to him, and would have kept him back that he should not go from them. But he said to them, I must needs announce the glad tidings of the kingdom of God to the other dues also, for for this I have been sent forth. And he was preaching in the synagogues of Galilee". So now we have to consider Luke's side of our subject, which depends on John's side; but the preaching is essential. It is not exactly the preaching of the Christ, but the preaching of the kingdom of God; that there is such a thing as that to be preached, and to be preached universally, as the Lord says, "... the other cities also". And for this travel is needed. The Spirit of God could reach a point and we cannot specify the time it would take to do it. The Spirit of God might move quickly in effecting new birth; but in order to preach the kingdom, the Lord moved in the ordinary outward way, involving what He came into as becoming Man. I speak of that advisedly, that as in the days of His flesh He toiled, travelling from city to city in God's service. And later the apostles did it; and so now it is for us to do it; to travel to preach the kingdom. It is in order to preach the kingdom; not simply preaching the gospel in the terms of it, but the kingdom of God, implying that it is in power.

A.R. What do you have in mind as to the Lord being here in a limited way?

J.T. He came here in flesh and blood. We have to be careful in saying that He was limited, but it is a question of what He submitted Himself to. He uses the words, "No one knows, neither the angels ... nor the Son", (Mark 13:32). One has to be careful in referring to such scriptures, but they are intelligible because the Lord, of Himself, entered into certain limitations to bring out

the position He had taken for the will of God. Here He says, "I must needs announce the glad tidings of the kingdom of God to the other cities also". He travelled from one place to another. There is no evidence that He carried on His service, in this physical sense, miraculously.

J.S. Do you think He alludes to His limitations when He says, "And how am I straitened until it shall have been accomplished!" (Luke 12:50)?

J.T. Yes. That bears directly on what we are saying.

A.P.T. It is remarkable how Luke in his further record in Acts says, "The word which he sent to the sons of Israel, preaching peace by Jesus Christ, (he is Lord of all things,) ye know; the testimony which has spread through the whole of Judea, beginning from Galilee", (Acts 10:36,37). It is interesting to see how the Lord served, as you remarked.

J.T. It becomes very testing and humbling in a way, and very affecting, because the Lord travelled, all these distances. It is never said that He used a conveyance except the ass on which He rode into Jerusalem. His feet carried Him. And so the woman of Luke 7 kissed His feet and anointed them with myrrh, evidently because they carried Him to her; that is what Luke would keep before us. It is what the Lord does in His grace and patience. He says, "I must work the works of him that has sent me while it is day", (John 9:4).

A.P.T. If a brother has ability to preach, do you think it is wise to preach every Lord's day evening?

J.T. Why are you asking that question?

A.P.T. We have had ministry as to our travelling in serving in the gospel, involving possible neglect in caring for local conditions. The matter of preaching the kingdom, as we have been considering it, is interesting, but are there not other things that are to govern our responsibility? It is important to look after the local company.

J.T. The home front has to be attended to. It is not

simply that we are good platform men; we must care for the saints, as well. So that in carrying on the service and testimony of God there is much more to do than to preach.

H.O.E. Going back to your reference to the Lord moving in a limited way, do you mean to convey the impression that the Lord would not always use His miraculous powers in service?

J.T. If all the service of the gospel were miraculous you can hardly say there would be faith. God came here in Jesus. Luke gives us the most beautiful touches about Him. He was a Babe in a manger, and grew up to boyhood and manhood. All was of God, but it was in normal growth. His conception and birth were miraculous, as we all know; but afterwards all was generally normal growth, until full manhood was reached. "The child grew and waxed strong in spirit, filled with wisdom, and God's grace was upon him", (Luke 2:40). The moral side is more stressed than the miraculous. After the Holy Spirit came upon Him and the consequent public testimony was rendered, what is stressed is that God was there. Nicodemus makes the great point, as to the Lord, that "none can do these signs that thou doest unless God be with him"; whereas Peter says He "went through all quarters doing good, and healing all that were under the power of the devil, because God was with him". Acts 10:38. In Luke 3:23 it says that Jesus was beginning to be about thirty years of age. That is to say, the Lord took on the service of God according to Levitical principles. That is the age at which the Levite began his service. And He waited until John was cast into prison. That is another thing; He would follow John. John began to serve before the Lord did, and the Lord would come after him. In John's gospel that side is omitted, but in the synoptic gospels it is clearly pointed out that He waited until John was cast into prison. John was beheaded. The

Lord is affected by these things. And, therefore, we have in Mark, who introduces the subject of the kingdom earlier than Luke: "Repent and believe in the glad tidings", chapter 1:15. That is the first thing the Lord said in Mark. He came and said that. Therefore, it is important to see how He was governed by Levitical principles and waited until the time came to enter on His service. Mark begins at once as to the actual service. He opens his gospel saying, "Beginning of the glad tidings of Jesus Christ, Son of God". That is the way Mark presents Him. He is abrupt, and his narrative is marked by the word "straightway".

A.R. What are the features of the preaching of the kingdom of God? Paul spoke about "my gospel".

J.T. The Lord alludes to the matter of preaching here. "And when it was day he went out, and went into a desert place". He was evidently alone there, and probably taking up time doing something with a purpose. "And the crowds sought after him". The idea of a desert is to be noted. The flesh will not be ministered to in a desert. And then it says, "... and came up to him, and would have kept him back that he should not go from them". We might say that the Lord should stay with them, but He is working out Levitical principles here, and He is saying to us that we must not be detained unduly. If it is on your heart to do something for the Lord, take the time to do it, but do not delay in it; do not spend too much time. So that it says that they "would have kept him back that he should not go from them", but He said, "I must needs announce the glad tidings of the kingdom of God to the other cities also, for for this I have been sent forth", verse 43. Now I have already remarked that He was not sent from heaven. Some one might say that this remark would indicate that He was, but it does not mean that. He was sent out as already here. It is after the Spirit came upon Him that He spoke of Himself as sent, as seen in verse 43. He is

telling those with Him that He has been sent forth to preach, that He is here on a mission, and this mission includes the idea of the kingdom of God. So it says, "And he was preaching in the synagogues of Galilee". It was a question of the kingdom.

W.R. It would seem from these verses in Luke that the Lord was under orders, and He was using His power at every moment to reach as many as possible that might be subjects for the kingdom.

J.T. Quite so; and how wonderful His work was! The amount of work He did is in evidence. Of course, all is not written, but what we have shows that what we do should be done well and not with negligence. Verse 20 of Luke 6 ought to be in our minds before we conclude this reading. "And he, lifting up his eyes upon his disciples, said. Blessed are ye poor, for yours is the kingdom of God" -- it is persons who are thus characterised. Psalm 41 says, "Blessed is he that understandeth the poor". I mention that because the Lord Himself is included in the idea of the "poor". The footnote there says, attendeth to, giveth head to, owneth. Heaven takes account of a man who is so viewed. The Lord is now speaking about the position of the apostles, and, indeed, the remnant that was here in His own time; how they were cared for by heaven. "He, lifting up his eyes upon his disciples, said. Blessed are ye poor, for yours is the kingdom of God". It seems to me that this is something which should be in our hearts. The kingdom of God is regarded as belonging to such; it is their proper portion -- the poor -- and the Lord says that they are blessed because of that.

J.S. Is not the King doing His own preaching in Luke? I am thinking of Ecclesiastes.

J.T. You mean king Solomon was the preacher. That is true. And then there is this other word m chapter 8 that we already alluded to and which I think would be a sort of

finish to our subject in this section -- the kind of people that were attached to the Lord in His service in the kingdom. He was an Object to them. They were ministering to Him of their substance, but it says, "he went through the country city by city, and village by village, preaching and announcing the glad tidings of the kingdom of God; and the twelve were with him, and certain women who had been healed of wicked spirits and infirmities, Mary who was called Magdalene, from whom seven demons had gone out, and Joanna, wife of Chuza, Herod's steward, and Susanna, and many others, who ministered to him of their substance", verses 1 - 3. The kingdom is seen here in a rich, flourishing way, and the Lord is seen in it as the Object of the twelve and others who had been blessed through His ministry.

C.F.E. How do we acquire the substance seen in these women here?

J.T. I would think that, viewed spiritually, it is acquired in the kingdom. Entering into the kingdom, you acquire spiritual wealth.

A.R. Why does Luke speak specially about women here?

J.T. It is remarkable; it is the subjective side. I believe the kingdom is worked out in them peculiarly, as making Christ an Object.

J.A.P. Is it a feature of the kingdom to minister substance, in that way, to those that travel?

J.T. Well, the passage intimates how the work was carried on in the Lord's own times, and how we are to be patient in it; "city by city, and village by village". Of course, we use means and methods that are available now for travel, but I think the idea is one city after another. When we come to chapter 10, we see that the seventy were sent out on this principle. "Now after these things the Lord appointed seventy others also, and sent them two and two before his face into every city and place where he himself was about to come. And he said to

them. The harvest indeed is great, but the workmen few; supplicate therefore the Lord of the harvest that he may send out workmen into his harvest. Go: behold I send you forth as lambs in the midst of wolves. Carry neither purse nor scrip nor sandals, and salute no one on the way. And into whatsoever house ye enter, first say. Peace to this house. And if a son of peace be there, your peace shall rest upon it; but if not it shall turn to you again", verses 1 - 6. Now this is a large number of workmen. They do not appear in chapter 4. These are the Lords men, seventy in number. The field is widening, and we have instructions to govern us, and I think the basis is laid for assemblies to be formed, because they were sent into "every city and place where he himself was about to come". And sons of peace is a leading idea. A son of peace is a man you can get on with. He is building material. The Lord coming to a place points to assembly formation. Thus not only is preaching contemplated, but also the result of it. For assemblies, as in Judaea, (1 Thessalonians 2:14), there must be sons of peace.

T.E.H. Would Acts 13 give us a wonderful example of this? There was the ministering to the Lord and then two of His servants were sent forth.

J.T. This chapter undoubtedly is in mind, because, as we already remarked, the gospels are intended to confirm the epistles, and the apostles' service. The Lord's own example, as seen here, is similar to the case of Barnabas and Saul.

A.B.P. Luke 8 seems to be "richly furnished", as Peter says in his epistle. "The twelve were with him", it says. Would that be administration? And then, would the women who ministered unto Him, afford the full scope for the kingdom, in that way?

J.T. Yes. You feel the administration is most important -- as seen in the twelve -- and must go with the service kingdom-wise, because if we are going from city to city, we encounter various elements; there were many

assemblies in Judaea after the Lord went to heaven, and these cities would imply need for administration, and I think it is the one thing that is not being used properly. It is remarkable that the twelve are there; and then these women would be there to afford fellowship, and to minister to those who serve in the gospel, that they are not wanting in anything.

A.B.P. Is this seen in the early Acts where the saints are referred to as continuing in the apostles' teaching and fellowship and in breaking of bread and prayers? The whole scope of the kingdom seems to be operating there.

J.T. Just so; I suppose the women here would represent the idea that there was no need. They "ministered to him of their substance".

J.T.Jr. And then we must link the great regard for His feet as seen in the previous chapter. "How beautiful upon the mountains are the feet of him that announceth glad tidings, that publisheth peace", (Isaiah 52:7). There is something in regard to the Lord's feet that is very precious.

J.T. I think that is especially to be noted, because there can be no doubt that Mary Magdalene is very like the woman in the end of chapter 7. She was a woman such as Mary Magdalene who was evidently devoted to wickedness at one time, but now she valued the feet of Jesus. She kissed His feet, and anointed them with ointment. It would seem as if we are to be reminded that what is needed in the ministry, is seen here. In Acts 2, what a furnishing there was! No one said that anything he had was his own; they had all things in common. It seems as if that is presented to us at the outset of Christianity to show what the mutual side is. There is no doubt that these persons seen in Luke 8 are intended to show us how the kingdom works out. They are subject persons and Christ is everything and in all to them.

A.B.P. It is significant that the apostles' feet were

prominent at the beginning, as also the feet of the lame man.

J.T. In what we have had before us today, I think there is a lesson to remain with us; especially those who are doing anything in the way of preaching; to see that the thing we preach is already here, because the kingdom is not mentioned until it is here. As we have seen, Luke contemplates that the kingdom was here in the Person of Christ.

THE KINGDOM OF GOD (7)

Luke 9:27 - 36; Luke 10:8 - 11; Luke 11:20; Luke 17:20 - 21

J.T. The reference to the mysteries of the kingdom, in the parable of sowing the seed, should be reserved for our consideration of Matthew, who gives us more on these points. It is thought that on this occasion we should confine ourselves particularly to the subject of the kingdom as it bears on the gospel. On the last occasion we touched on chapter 8 and now it is thought that we should consider the mount of transfiguration, which seems to be a turning point in the subject. The kingdom there is not viewed as it is now in connection with the gospel, but evidently in an entirely spiritual way. In chapter 9, verse 27 to the end of verse 36, we have an account of what happened on the holy mount; referring not to the moral features of the kingdom down here, but to what is up there; what is spiritual. The word is, "There are some of those standing here who shall not taste death until they shall have seen the kingdom of God", verse 27. The characteristic features are not designated: it is just the kingdom of God. In Mark, the corresponding passage says, "There are some of those standing here that shall not taste death until they shall have seen the kingdom of God come in power", chapter 9:1. And in Matthew, "There are some of those standing here that shall not taste of death at all until they shall have seen the Son of man coming in his kingdom", chapter 16: 28. Here, in Luke 9, it is just the kingdom of God without any qualification; clearly not the kingdom of God as we have been looking at it in Romans and Corinthians, but rather how it is to be apprehended as up there, as a wholly spiritual matter. And there follow illustrations that bear on this -- or on which this bears -- such as chapter 10, in which the seventy are sent out, obviously in order to make way for the formation of

assemblies. Therefore, what is before us runs into the present dispensation and present circumstances, and the formation of assemblies; because it is said that, the seventy were sent out. "The Lord appointed seventy others also", meaning that they were in addition to the twelve, "and sent them two and two before his face into every city and place where he himself was about to come", chapter 10:1. It is where the Lord comes, and of course we have learned to count upon Him coming to us in assembly, and undoubtedly the allusion is to this, so that it is Christ coming in from heaven. Having gone up. He is viewed in that light. And the expression "son of peace" runs through the instruction. Sons of peace are to be looked for. And in chapter 11, in order to bring this out more clearly, we have the idea of the finger of God: the Lord cast out demons by the finger of God, and that was the proof that the kingdom of God had come. Matthew speaks of this in the same connection, as the Spirit of God and, of course, there was the living evidence, but the finger of God is evidently God intervening, according to the statement by the Spirit in the Acts, that the Lord "went through all quarters doing good ... because God was with him", (Acts 10:38). So that the kingdom in this setting is mediatorial. It is God and His finger, but it is through Christ; God is working through Christ. And then in chapter 17 we have the formal assertion that the kingdom of God is in the midst of them, meaning that it was a question of what was in Christ, and what is in Him now. It has not come with observation; it is not in a public way, but in a moral way, and yet it is in Christ. "The kingdom of God is in the midst of you", verse 21.

J.S. Is seeing a special feature here?

J.T. Well, that is what it says. They should not see death until they saw the kingdom, which would greatly emphasise the idea of John 3; persons who can see it and who can enter into it.

J.H.E. That would bring in the eyes of the heart mentioned in Ephesians?

J.T. Just so; what we see inwardly.

C.A.M. Would you say that to get a correct view of it we have to look at it from the top?

J.T. Yes; and to see how it embraces the legislative and administrative branches of the kingdom of God.

J.T.Jr. Does Peter's reference to this help as to the bearing on this dispensation? He says that the Lord received honour and glory from God the Father. Would that connect with Peter's part in the dispensation?

J.T. That is in the mount, (2 Peter 1:17); just so, Peter himself had a peculiar part in the administration; not, however, in the sense in which we are speaking of it now. Peter had the keys of the kingdom, alluding to the power of administration.

A.N.W. Would it be right to speak of what transpired on the mount as a private view of the kingdom, it still being true, that it did not come by observation? Would that be right to say?

J.T. It would. It was a vision on the top. Matthew calls it a vision.

A.B.P. You suggest that legislation was seen in Moses and administration in Elijah?

J.T. That is what I was thinking, although it is very general. That is the idea suggested. It is the linking up of the Old Testament economy with the present one. It is not a question of the assembly, because the Old Testament, save in type, does not contemplate that. It is the kingdom.

A.B.P. Would you say a little more about administration in relation to Elijah?

J.T. Well, he came in at a time when the legislative side in Israel had failed. Elijah was peculiarly used to meet the situation. It was a time of quickening in the administration of what is of God, which is always important especially when there is a lapse, so that you are

impressed with the place that Elijah has as alongside of Moses, as if he were almost equal. And I think it would mean what personal service may be in a time of decline; of what one man can do. And so he is alluded to by James in this sense; what he did by prayer, he prayed with prayer. And so it is that James is said to be himself signalised in that the Lord appeared to him; as if he represented the service of one man, what one man may be or do. That ought to be an incentive to us, each one, to do something, because something has to be done if one is to be signalised.

W.F.K. Is glory connected with the kingdom? They beheld His glory.

J T Quite so; these men were there, but only in the way of enhancement of the position; not to remain. They talked with Jesus. It is very remarkable that they should be the ones to speak to Him. It is said, "As he prayed the fashion of his countenance became different and his raiment white and effulgent. And lo, two men talked with him, who were Moses and Elias", verses 29, 30. They are not angels. The point is that they are men. These great officers, either as legislative or administrative, are men. It shows that God has laid hold of men and is thinking of men in what He is doing.

W.F.K. Did they represent something in past testimony? .,..

J.T. They did; that is what we are saying: what Moses was in his service; what Elias was in his. How distinguished they were in it! One of them when he died, was hidden in burial; God Himself buried him, but Elias was not buried; he went up to heaven in a whirlwind.

R.W.S. Does Elijah's taking the twelve stones in the repairing of the altar, 1 Kings 18:30,31, bear on administration.

J.T. It does, clearly. The altar is repaired; it represented twelve. Moses had the same idea in the

twelve pillars. Exodus 24. They did not need repairing, but one point with Elijah is repair: the resetting up of things, and that in power. What Moses inaugurated needed repair.

F.S.C. Does the Lord represent the subjective side of the kingdom? He was in subjection to the Father; He prayed.

J.T. Yes, in the sense that He was subject; this characterised Him as become Man. The word usually means something that is inward and consciously realized as over against what is objective; but I see your point. It is a great point throughout this gospel that the Lord is seen about ten times in prayer. In this chapter we have Him thus, verse 18: "... as he was praying alone". And in chapter 11 He is seen praying and one of the disciples asked Him to teach them to pray, verse 1. And in the end of this chapter, verse 29, He is seen in prayer when He is changed: His countenance became different, and His raiment white and effulgent; showing the attitude as honoured.

R.W.S. When you use the expression up there is that heaven as over against what is on the earth?

J.T. Well, it is just according to the meaning of the phrase. The word up has a very great place in Scripture, even in regard to the resurrection. It is applied to the resurrection, but not always; that is, we have Christ raised from among the dead, Romans 4:24, and Christ raised up from among the dead, Romans 8:11.

A.P.T. In Revelation 4 the voice says, "Come up here". Is that the idea?

J.T. Quite so; caught up into paradise; caught up to the third heaven. Scripture says. Have you anything else in mind?

R.W.S. I am not quite clear as to the bearing of this. I would like to follow the instruction, as you quote the book, whether this was actually present, though a future setting, and why it was brought in.

J.T. It was obviously to impress the disciples. It has the same importance as Paul's ascension to the third heaven. It has the same bearing as John being caught up, as has just been remarked, "Come up here". That is to impress us with the greatness of what we are connected with and what we will come into; it should bear on us down here in the time of our humiliation.

A.P.T. Verse 26 begins with the word "For" and verse 27 with the word "But". Would that help to denote what the Lord has in mind in a spiritual sense?

J.T. Quite so. The "but" is the transfer to something else. "But I say unto you of a truth ..." The "but" there is to carry you from one thing over to something else; a great matter that the Lord had in His mind.

A.N.W. Has it not a direct bearing on their tasting death? The Lord makes a point of that, that they shall not taste death until they have seen the kingdom of God.

J.T. They would be equal to Elijah in that sense and also, in a sense to Moses -- something extraordinary -- something was to happen and they were not to taste death before it happened.

E.E.H. Would you say it was educational for the disciples to have seen this?

J.T. It would be highly educational. I suppose it would be one of those things which would be landmarks in their histories, like (1 Corinthians 15), where the Lord is said to have appeared to so many. There were above five hundred of them who saw the Lord at one time; and Paul says, "Of whom the most remain until now", showing that they would be distinguished persons, and that is a great matter, to be distinguished among the people of God.

C.F.E. Is there any thought in the eight days mentioned here?

J.T. I suppose it points to a further development; passing on to something else; another dispensation. It

is a change over from seven. We have six days in Mark 9.

A.R. Moses had wished to see God's glory, but he could see only God's hinder parts, but this is a question of His face. What is the difference?

J.T. Well, we are in the realm of revelation now, and revelation is a question of the face of God; of seeing God in Christ here and hearing His voice, the Father's voice.

J.T.Jr. Would the prayer in verse 18 be on the level of what was down here, because He goes on to speak of His sufferings and of His being killed, and then in verse 28, "He went up into a mountain to pray;" that is, prayer is on the mountain? Does that involve the change we are speaking about?

J.T. Yes; I think it is to show that. We are told that He has passed through all the heavens; that is, the idea of ascension attaches to Him. He might have gone up without dying, and did here, because it was going up. "He went up into a mountain". "If then ye see the Son of man ascending up where he was before?" (John 6:62).

J.A.P. Is there help in Paul's remarks in 2 Corinthians 3:18? "But we all, looking on the glory of the Lord, with unveiled face, are transformed according to the same image". Does that help us as getting a view of Christ, and we becoming like Him?

J.T. It does; it has a bearing on it, because the "same image" in the passage includes His image -- "from glory to glory". There is a strong link here with that, but there is no change in any one, but in Christ here. The apostles remained just as they were, but He was changed. The wording, "as he prayed", is remarkable, too, showing, as our brother said already, the position prayer has in this wonderful scene. "And as he prayed the fashion of his countenance became different and his raiment white and effulgent".

A.B.P. Is the present service of Christ as intercessor a part of the functioning of the kingdom of God? I

there a link between His prayer on the mount here and His present place as interceding for the saints?

J.T. Undoubtedly it is intended to bear on the whole scene that the movement begins there, real movement begins there. The attitude of prayer would imply that He is interceding. I suppose He is thinking of the three He brought up with Him; that they would understand it was worth while to be taken up and that His prayer had entered into it.

A.R. Do you have in mind to say something more about the Lord's countenance being changed here? Is it suggested that Moses and Elias were changed? They, "appearing in glory", spoke with Him.

J.T. The thought is that they came out from it. They are not said to be changed. They really represent the heavenly saints, but the Lord had been down here in testimony and service, and the bearing is on that. The bearing is not on Moses and Elias or what the occasion would be to them. They are simply representative as augmenting and filling out the scene. The angels are not there, they are not in mind. It is men -- "two men". The change in the Lord gave character to the occasion. The whole movement is seen to begin in Him. "And it came to pass after these words, about eight days, that taking Peter and John and James he went up into a mountain to pray. And as he prayed the fashion of his countenance became different and his raiment white and effulgent", verses 28, 29. That is the position. The movement is clearly in connection with Him. It is a great matter that the saints who form the assembly, represented in the three apostles, are brought into the movement, which presently will be enlarged to the universe. All the coming glory will begin with Christ; He is "the beginning".

A.R. He is the Speaker -- "Hear him"; is that the idea?

J.T. Yes; the great Mover, the Beginner of everything

. The apostles were unequal to this display of glory; indeed, they were oppressed with sleep, and later Peter spoke of making three tabernacles; one for the Lord, one for Moses and one for Elias, showing they were not delivered from the Jewish system. What is presented is to glorify Christ in His kingdom. Thus it is said, "as he was saying these things, there came a cloud and overshadowed them, and they feared as they entered into the cloud: and there was a voice out of the cloud saying. This is my beloved Son: hear him", verses 34,35. It is a question of hearing what is said by Him. What is current in His ministry down here is in mind.

J.T.Jr. Would the idea of majesty be seen in the condition in which Moses and Elias were as they spoke to the Lord in that He was in majesty then? Would all that remain in the apostles' minds?

J.T. That is the idea; the majesty of Christ would enter into Peter's ministry, as we can see by his second epistle. It is remarkable that he did not write about it in his first letter. It shows that apostolic ministry was governed by the Spirit.

R.W.S. The feature of the kingdom of God in this setting is the majesty of the Person?

J.T. Yes; but there are other accompanying things that belong to the kingdom, because it is a question of seeing the kingdom, not any special movement or feature of it, but the thing itself; the whole thing is to be seen there. Thus the Lord's announcement in Luke is, "... until they shall have seen the kingdom of God".

A.N.W. What is the warning to us in this oppressive sleep that comes upon the disciples on this august occasion?

J.T. It certainly ought to mean at least that we should not sleep in the meetings! Sleeping in the meetings is derogatory, even if we are tired and weary; the Lord was weary, too. We ought to learn to respect the place. We cannot say that Peter and the others added anything

to the great occasion. That is the thing to notice; that we should avoid the things in which they broke down. The mount of transfiguration was a most striking testimony to Christ's glory.

A.R. You mean that we should see the kingdom Christ's glory -- now?

J.T. It is characteristic of Luke that what the three selected to go up were to see was the kingdom of God. It is a group of circumstances in which He is to shine; we are to see the things that we are brought into. We are brought into a system of things, not only persons, but things. The man in Mark had his eyes opened and saw "all things" clearly; not only a divine Person, but the things related to Him.

D.A.P. Would Peter and those who were sleeping miss what the two men were speaking about to Jesus?

J.T. Yes, they were speaking about what they were seeing; it was His decease which He should accomplish at Jerusalem. The moral glory of Jesus was in their minds more than the physical glory there. The moral glory was wrapped up in what they were saying: that is to say. His departure; as Israel departed, so He is departing out of the world. It should be accomplished; it was His moral glory, a matter of accomplishment -- and where? At Jerusalem!

A.B.P. Should we normally have in mind the thought of departure? Our life is not an earthly matter; while having part in it here by the Spirit, it is native to heaven.

J.T. That is right; there ought to be moral glory in all our departures. "Precious in the sight of Jehovah is the death of his saints", (Psalm 116:15). There is moral glory attaching to a real Christian in his death.

A.Mac. Is that seen in both Moses and Elijah? Both of them went up at their end, and sight entered into it. Moses saw certain things from the mount, and Elijah saw certain things, too.

J.T. Just so; they are linked together peculiarly in

that way. They are selected by God to fill out this wonderful scene. But what we were just saying is really the thing to be thought of by all of us; how the moral glory of Jesus was occupying Moses and Elias and they were talking with Him about it; He was not talking to them about it.

W.F.K. Would the white raiment suggest purity in the kingdom?

J.T. I should say so; it is a feature of Luke here, and at the Lord's resurrection, and at His ascension that there were those who stood by in white garments. Well, now, chapter 10, as we said before, points to the formation of assemblies -- that feature of the kingdom. It enters into the formation of the assembly. The assemblies are to be characterised by the Lord's visitations. "Now after these things the Lord appointed seventy others also, and sent them two and two before his face into every city and place where he himself was about to come", chapter 10:1. The whole passage would, I think, confirm what we are saying now. The idea of the word 'assembly' does not enter into it exactly, but it says, in verse 2, "The harvest indeed is great, but the workmen few; supplicate therefore the Lord of the harvest that he may send out workmen into his harvest. Go: behold I send you forth as lambs in the midst of wolves. Carry neither purse nor scrip nor sandals", verses 2 - 4. We have been speaking lately of travelling lightly and those that have goods need to be in exercise as to them. We do not take anything out of the world, nor should a servant of Christ think of taking anything out with him, as we have here: "carry neither purse nor scrip nor sandals, and salute no one on the way. And into whatsoever house you enter, first say. Peace to this house. And if a son of peace be there, your peace shall rest upon it; but if not it shall turn to you again. And in the same house abide, eating and drinking such things as they have; for the workman is worthy of his hire. Remove not from house to house", verses 4 - 7.

C.A.M. It has been said that Luke's line makes way for Paul's ministry. This account of the seventy sent from city to city is peculiar to Luke. Do you think that should govern us now as moving about; that we thus enter into the idea of Paul's travellings, for instance?

J.T. Yes; I should say Paul represents the highest idea the Lord had in service. He says, "Be ye imitators of me, even as I also am of Christ". These seventy are sent out after the apostles. Paul somewhat corresponds as coming in after the twelve, and as having laboured more abundantly than they all.

A.R. Lydia would be like a son of peace; Paul went to her house at Philippi.

J.T. Quite so; the Lord saw to it that she was, because I think He intended her to be a suitable one to receive Paul and those who accompanied him. It is said that the Lord opened her heart to attend to the things spoken by Paul, and that would enhance the conditions. And so when he was leaving the city he "came to Lydia". If a brother visits us here, who is he going to see? That becomes a test.

A.R. Her house has peace in it; our houses should have peace in them.

J.T. Luke 10 calls for sons of peace.

R.W.S. Does the thought of, "Let not the assembly be charged", enter into this? Would the glory of that bear on this section? These Levites are sent forth; might it be some addition to the service in which the glory of that ministry is involved?

J.T. What the Lord said, as seen here, would indicate that. He said, "Behold I send you forth as lambs in the midst of wolves. Carry neither purse nor scrip nor sandals, and salute no one on the way. And into whatsoever house ye enter, first say. Peace to this house. And if a son of peace be there, your peace shall rest upon it; but if not it shall turn to you again. And in the same house abide, eating and drinking such things as they

have", verses 3 - 7. It would look as if the servant has a free house; that he has free surroundings; nothing to hinder him in his service. And he is not a burden on the person with whom he is staying.

A.P.T. There is an excellent illustration of the kingdom in chapter 22, where the Lord sends Peter and John to the city. They meet a man with a pitcher of water and the master of the house seems to be ready for them; a son of peace.

J.T. I think Luke has all that in mind. He has a great sense of the greatness of the thing he is dealing with; that is, the moral greatness of it; hence, when he writes to Theophilus the second time he is quite free, evidently having the sense that Theophilus was reducing his own estimation of himself. The word "excellent" is dropped in the second treatise.

E.A.L. I believe you have said that a minister being over particular would lack in spiritual control; that in the servant natural likes and dislikes should be under control.

J.T. Just so; we do not want to acquire priestcraft. Those of religious reputation assume power over people and make demands upon them. The liberty of sonship makes us free and righteous in the houses of the saints.

A.N.W. "Such things as they have", is the statement the Lord makes, (Luke 10:7).

J.T. Just so.

J.T.Jr. Is this thought of two in regard of the servants carried forward from chapter 9 where it is seen in Moses and Elias? There would be the idea of legislation and administration here also?

J.T. Yes; "two are better than one", the Scripture says. There is great increase in the idea of two.

R.W.S. Do they carry in their affections the ministry of the glory of chapter 9?

J.T. I would think so; I suppose Paul and Barnabas are the best illustration of two working together in the

truth. Peter and John first, and then Paul and Barnabas, as if the Lord illustrates what He said, which is a feature of the gospels. They confirm what you get in the Acts and the epistles. Things are confirmed in the actual facts presented. So you can picture the glory that was reflected in Peter and John, as they say, "Look on us". And then, as we said, Paul and Barnabas, and later, Paul and Silas. These facts are illustrative of what we are dealing with here; how the kingdom was set out in Christians, and how we should learn from them. The scene on the mount is illustrated in the fact that Mary, as seen in chapter 10, is sitting at the feet of Jesus and hearing His word. She is setting out the kingdom in that sense, and that helps us as to how the gospels confirm what we have in the epistles.

A.E.W. Would Paul be like a son of peace in the last chapter of the Acts? -- "in his own hired lodging", preaching the kingdom of God and receiving all who came to him.

J.T. It was indeed a free house!

A.R. We have been having the teaching of the kingdom of God, and now we see it demonstrated.

J.T. Quite so; and if a man who has a house uses it in a hospitable way, the brethren are free to go there.

Question. What would you say about the house in 2 Kings 4 in relation to this?

J.T. The Shunammite was a 'great' person. She made a home for Elisha. That illustrates it very well. I have no doubt she is the continuation of the wife of the son of the prophet, who sold the oil and paid her debts. She and her sons thus became free. So she was free in her house because she paid her debts. We cannot entertain freely unless we pay our debts. And so the Shunammite is not in debt; she is capable of entertaining the prophet and entertains him well.

A.A.T. I notice that in Luke 10 there is the healing of the sick, and then in chapter 11 the finger of God is

spoken of as the power active in the kingdom of God.

J.T. That is what we will get at now. The word was, that when the disciples visited any city the people there were to know that the kingdom of God had come nigh them. That is a great matter, if I am a preacher or teacher, or whatever I may be, that I am to be able to say something as to the kingdom of God coming nigh to people. Even if they have not received it, it has come nigh to them. It is a testimony to be rendered. And as to the finger of God, it says, "But if by Beelzebub cast out demons, your sons -- by whom do they cast them out? For this reason they shall be your judges. But if by the finger of God I cast out demons, then the kingdom of God is come upon you", verses 19,20. That, I think, is to bring out that God was with them. The apostle implies that the testimony will be given, "God is indeed amongst you". That marked the assembly at Corinth; that God was there. The Lord said to Paul there, "I am with thee, and no one shall set upon thee to injure thee". And so he stayed there for eighteen months and the result was that a large assembly was formed there.

J.A.P. Would it seem that the kingdom of God, having a heavenly side to it, is opposed by Satan's kingdom? In Ephesians reference is made to the power of spiritual wickedness in the heavenlies; is that set up to compete with the kingdom?

J.T. Well, the charge was by the Lord's enemies in verse 15: "But some from among them said. By Beelzebub the prince of the demons casts he out demons". That was the attack of the devil that should never be forgiven, according to another passage. And so the Lord goes on to say here, "Every kingdom divided against itself is brought to desolation: and a house set against a house falls; and if also Satan is divided against himself, how shall his kingdom subsist? because ye say that I cast out demons by Beelzebub. But if by Beelzebub cast out demons, your sons -- by whom do

they cast them out? For this reason they shall be your judges. But if by the finger of God I cast out demons, then the kingdom of God is come upon you". It is not simply come nigh them; but come upon them; and upon them as a sort of moral judgment, for we have the idea of the stone cut out without hands; it breaks to pieces those on whom it falls, (Daniel 2:34).

A.R. In Exodus 8 the scribes said to Pharaoh, "This is the finger of God!"

J.T. Quite so; it is a remarkable thing; possibly the Lord had that circumstance in mind; that is, the plague of the gnats or lice. It was the finger of God. What they had in Egypt was really here -- the finger of God -- and who can stand against it? It is the power of God, in that sense; they could not stand against it. Another thing is that the gnats were never removed, meaning, evidently, that power is here, despised and under reproach, but here nevertheless. It alludes to the saints as characterised by the power of life.

A.R. The living kingdom, in that sense, in life.

J.T. That is the idea exactly; it is a question of life. The finger of God, I suppose, would point to accuracy and detail; nothing is omitted. I think that is it. We all know about the fingers of a man, and what they wrote on the wall; they meant the overthrow of the Babylonish kingdom. It was most accurate and sudden; the thing happened that night.

A.R. We have, in the idea of the gnats, the power in the saints for the overthrow of the Egyptian kingdom.

A.B.P. Is the judicial side of the kingdom seen in, "they shall be your judges"?

J.T. Quite so; that was something they would have to reckon on and the kingdom coming upon them is remarkable, it seems to me. It is not simply coming nigh; it is the power of it adversely; it grinds to powder.

A.B.P. In that relation the judges will take up the details eventually?

J.T. Just so; "... and books were opened". (Revelation 20:12). And then, Luke 17:20 says, "And having been asked by the Pharisees, When is the kingdom of God coming? he answered them and said. The kingdom of God does not come with observation; nor shall they say, Lo here, or, Lo there; for behold, the kingdom of God is in the midst of you". He is here calling attention to Himself as in the midst of Israel, as answering the Pharisees.

J.T.Jr. Does that apply today in the way the Lord is among us?

J.T. I thought so; on the line of what we had already as to the Lord being in the midst of the assembly; that a man should come in who would fall down and worship; he acknowledges what is there and reports that "God is indeed amongst you". That is an immense testimony, that God is amongst a certain people of a truth. There is no question about it and the fact that there are such companies on earth is something that the Lord can fall back on in the judgment day.

W.R. Would you say the kingdom of God is not only in Christ now, but in the saints?

J.T. Exactly; that is what is meant; the Spirit of God is here; divine Persons are here. The conditions are as great or greater than they were during the Lord's presence on earth. He told the apostles, "Greater works than these shall he do because I go unto my Father".

J.T.Jr. Is the order of things in the kingdom in mind? It says in chapter 9, "But Peter and those with him ... having fully awoke up they saw his glory, and the two men". Is that linked up with this scripture in that the Lord says, "The kingdom of God is in the midst of you"? So that we see a system of things functioning in men.

J.T. I would say that, especially the twos that were sent out; the thirty-five pairs sent out in witness to the kingdom. It was in them in principle. And you may

say that it is a figure of the present time, making way for Him to come Himself. "All the time in which the Lord Jesus came in and went out among us, beginning from the baptism of John until the day in which he was taken up from us". (Acts 1:21,22).

A.B.P. There seems to be a judicial aspect to Abraham's word to the rich man in chapter 16: "They have Moses and the prophets". That would be represented in Moses and Elias, I suppose, but now the kingdom is amongst them in Christ personally. Would their condemnation be that they had Christ amongst them and had not believed?

J.T. I thing it is remarkable that this matter is being revived peculiarly, we might say, in our times, because it was not much stressed in the beginning of the revival. It has been stressed more lately -- the thought of the Lord coming to the saints. There was an opposition to that, which meant that He was here all the time, which is true, in a sense, but not all the truth. All the truth includes what John says, quoting the Lord: "I am coming to you"; not I have come to you, but, "I am coming to you".

F.S.C. The Lord seemed to face great opposition after the mount of transfiguration, did He not?

J.T. I thought that would be apparent in this remarkable section. What a section of vitality and activity; numbers added to the economy; not only the twelve, but the "seventy others also ... two and two", making way for the Lord to come.

A.R. In chapter 5 of the Acts a man stands up in the council and says, in effect. You are fighting against God in fighting against these people. The position is impregnable. You cannot overthrow that! It involves the kingdom.

J.T. That is very important; and the addition of persons in the seventy sent out as labourers must be especially noted. We are not told who they were any

more than we are told who the five hundred were to whom the Lord appeared, but they were all distinguished. Here the seventy are making way for the Lord, and what does it matter what others think of us if we are making way for the Lord?

J.S. Do we see the power of the testimony in the seventy in the overthrow of Satan?

J.T. That is what we get later in chapter 10. They reported that the demons were subject to them. It says in verse 17, "And the seventy returned with joy, saying, Lord, even the demons are subject to us through thy name". That is remarkable, because it would be connected with the finger of God: "And he said to them, I beheld Satan as lightning falling out of heaven. Behold, I give you the power of treading upon serpents and scorpions and over all the power of the enemy, and nothing shall in anywise injure you. Yet in this rejoice not, that the spirits are subjected to you, but rejoice that your names are written in the heavens". And then the Lord rejoices: "In the same hour Jesus rejoiced in spirit and said, I praise thee. Father, Lord of the heaven and of the earth, that thou hast hid these things from wise and prudent, and hast revealed them to babes: yea. Father, for thus has it been well-pleasing in thy sight. All things have been delivered to me by my Father, and no one knows who the Son is but the Father, and who the Father is but the Son, and he to whomsoever the Son is pleased to reveal him", verses 17 - 22. Well, now, all that has come into our own times in a most remarkable way. It has been stressed in our own times; hence the importance, and solemnity, too, of what the Lord has given to His people, as to whether we are in any way affected by it, because the Lord is stressing here the importance of the persons and their names. We do not know them on earth, but they are written in heaven.

D.P. Would the power the seventy had be an extension

of what the Lord referred to as casting out demons by the finger of God?

J.T. That is the thought. The finger of God in Luke is really the Spirit of God in Matthew; it is the same incident, and that should be the point with us; that God is among us of a truth.

A.R. The Lord uses the title. Lord of the heaven and earth, in this passage. Is that the idea of the kingdom? He is not only Lord of heaven but also of earth.

J.T. It is the Father; it brings us really to Ephesians, which is the height of the truth with which we are dealing. Luke enlarges it. The Lord says, in chapter 10, that He beheld Satan as lightning falling from heaven, but later it is said, and Peace in heaven, "glory in the highest". It is not now peace on earth, as at the beginning of the gospel, but in heaven, because as we proceed in Luke we are instructed on the heavenly line. That is the point on which we should be clear.

J.S. To make place for the assembly?

J.T. Just so; because the assembly is going to fill it.

R.D.G. Is it particularly significant that in chapter 17 the question of the kingdom is raised by the Pharisees, who live in the world of appearances? The Lord points out definitely that it is not a question of appearances or "observation".

J.T. If it is a question of appearances, it is a question of the religion of the world. Great importance is being made of freedom of worship in the Atlantic Charter and I have seen a picture of worshippers, representing this idea. The human idea of a number of persons seen in a picture worshipping is what interests the Pharisees. They can talk about that, but we should know something different from that. God is a spirit, and we must worship Him in spirit and truth. He is stressing that to us now, in association with the other things we are speaking of. The truth that God is a spirit enters into preparation for heaven. We belong to a spiritual realm where we

know God and worship Him according to what He is.

A.N.W. As "come nigh" the kingdom means blessing; as "coming upon" man it means judicial action; and as in "the midst" it represents power. Is that a right presentation of the truth?

J.T. I think it is. "I am coming to you" is a beautiful expression. It came up in power amongst us about forty years ago. It is mainly seen in John. It was alleged that the Lord Jesus is here all the time; whereas the beauty of the truth is that He comes. It is a divine movement: "I am coming to you", the Lord says. Matthew quotes the Lord as saying, "Behold, I am with you all the days", and of course that has to be understood and accepted. It is in keeping with Matthew's side of the truth which, of course, does not weaken John's line, which contemplates movement by the Lord while in heaven, as seen in Acts and 1 Corinthians 15, whereas Matthew records no ascension.

A.P.T. John 20 says, "And the doors shut where the disciples were, through fear of the Jews", verse 19. Would the kingdom underlie that in some way?

J.T. Quite so; you mean there is power there to shut the doors. The doors are in the plural; it is not door. The saints have power within them to shut out what intrudes. That is what is implied; it is the kingdom, I would think.

R.W.S. When it speaks of the days of His receiving up, in chapter 9, does that have any bearing on what we are speaking of?

J.T. Yes, it does, in the sense that the apostle that was to be named to fill the place of Judas was to be one who had experience in "all the time in which the Lord Jesus came in and went out among us, beginning from the baptism of John until the day in which he was taken up". (Acts 1:22). It was necessary that the apostle selected should have that experience. Therefore, it enters into what we are saying, that the power of the

kingdom is involved in the Lord's coming to us. There is nothing to hinder us. "Lift up your heads, ye gates; yea, lift up, ye everlasting doors, and the King of glory shall come in". Psalm 24:9. That may be applied to the saints now, although it will be an earthly scene in the future, but the door is now opened to the King of glory.

THE KINGDOM OF GOD (8)

Matthew 3:1 - 17; Matthew 4:23 - 25; Matthew 5:1 - 21,44 - 48

J.T. In considering the subject before us, we have already looked at certain sections of the epistle to the Romans, the epistles to the Corinthians, and the gospels by John and Luke. In the remaining readings, therefore, including this one, we shall need to touch on Matthew and Mark, so as to link on with all the gospels. It is thought that we should look at Matthew now as treating of the kingdom of the heavens, a term that is almost confined to Matthew. The word heavens is used in the plural here, as will be noticed, and would undoubtedly link on more particularly with what is called "the expanse" which was named by God, "Heavens"; it is that part of the heavens which comes nearest to us. We cannot say much as to the number of heavens there are, but certainly there are three, and our subject would link on more with what is nearest to us; what is designated as "the expanse" in Genesis 1. It would seem as if the term is intended, as connected with the kingdom, to direct our view more to the heavenly side. In Matthew 6, the Lord's prayer is that the kingdom of God was to come. It was to be prayed for; that His will should be done on earth as it is in heaven. So that what is before us now is to see how the divine will is to be worked out now in us down here on the earth as it is in heaven. And another thing that is to be noted is the thought of the King; we have the genealogy of the King in this gospel. "Book of the generation of Jesus Christ, Son of David, Son of Abraham". It is to be noted that He is said to be "Son of David" before He is said to be "Son of Abraham", as if the thought of the King should be stressed; thus the Lord's genealogy is traced, in Matthew, through forty two generations; and it is said the forty second reached to Christ. "All the generations, therefore, from Abraham to David were fourteen generations; and from

David until the carrying away of Babylon, fourteen generations; and from the carrying away of Babylon unto the Christ, fourteen generations". This gospel, therefore, contemplates the Lord as the legally established King, the true David. He is "Son of David", but the King; in fact, the "great King". And then another thing to be noted, as we shall see, is that the idea of righteousness is in mind throughout this book more than in the other gospels. So the Lord said to John, according to what we read in chapter 3, "Thus it becometh us to fulfil all righteousness", verse 15. That would be righteousness in the ordinary sense, but also what may be called ecclesiastical righteousness, because Matthew is the only gospel writer that formally mentions the assembly. It is he who tells us of the foundation of it and also the structure of it. Joseph, the reputed father of the Lord Jesus, is particularly said to be a righteous man, which is an important thing; referring not simply to an incident, but to a matter that involves a principle in the gospel. It is said, in verse 19 of chapter 1: "But Joseph, her husband, being a righteous man ..." He behaved in a most comely and godly way toward Mary, his wife, in view of the revelation he had from God; all being governed by righteousness. That was the point.

C.A.M. The beginning of the chapter we read speaks of the "wilderness of Judaea". I was wondering, when you were speaking about the heavens, if the existence of the wilderness does not imply that earth was not fully answering to heaven as yet.

J.T. Therefore it involves discipline.

C.A.M. Yes; it just occurred to me that it would involve that. It would involve the prophetic word also, would you say?

J.T. The position entered into John's ministry, as we see in Isaiah 40:6. The wilderness is to be changed so as to blossom as a rose; thus the disciplinary character of it will be over; but while it lasts, there is need for discipline.

John the baptist is said to have been in the deserts. That is the wilderness in an intensified way, as the plural indicates. He had to do with wilderness conditions in view of the ministry that was entrusted to him. It would qualify him so that he would be sympathetic with others in whatever adverse circumstances they might be.

R.W.S. Would you enlarge on your remarks as to the kingdom of heaven being related to the heaven that is nearest to us?

J.T. I think it is the atmospheric heavens; that is, the heavens that were made on the second day of creation, called "the expanse". It is said in Genesis 1:6, "And God said, Let there be an expanse in the midst of the waters, and let it be a division between waters and waters. And God made the expanse, and divided between the waters that are under the expanse and the waters that are above the expanse; and it was so. And God called the expanse Heavens. And there was evening, and there was morning -- a second day". Now that is clearly something additional to what is mentioned in verse 1 in which we read, "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth"; but in verse 6 we have detail as to how what is called the "expanse" became formed; that there were waters above it and below it, and we cannot but see that what is alluded to is an extension of what is spoken of in verse 1. Our Lord Jesus Christ went up to heaven -- involving verse 6. What he reached beyond that, we have to think of, because He went beyond "all the heavens". Paul said, of himself, that he went to "the third heaven", but evidently there is what is beyond that. Therefore we come back to what is immediate, in what is called "Heavens" in verse 8. Our feet are on the earth now; that is, the believers' feet, in the wilderness period. Therefore the feet of the saints are spoken of in the types. The children of Israel did not have to buy shoes in the wilderness. God kept them

from the need of shoes; what they had lasted to the end of the wilderness journey.

A.R. Does the kingdom of heaven suggest elevation?

J.T. It does; the kingdom of the heavens is elevation, but in the sense that the elevation involves the will of God, and the Lord's prayer implies that that will should be done on the earth as well as in heaven. We are not above yet; it is while we are here below that the will of God is to be carried out and hence the kingdom is needed down here. And that is what we get in these passages read, because John the baptist first speaks about the kingdom of the heavens in chapter 3, and then the Lord Himself speaks about it in chapter 4 and it is touched on in detail in chapter 5.

J. S. Do you view the heavens as ruling in the light of heaven?

J.T. That is another thing; they rule in a moral sense. They rule because the will of God is carried out there, but God Himself, of course, rules; He rules, and the heavens, in that sense, rule, according to what the book of Daniel teaches.

A.N.W. When John says that the kingdom of heaven has drawn nigh, is it a matter of time, or is it the Person of the Lord he has in view?

J.T. The time enters into it because we are told in verse 12 of chapter 4, "But having heard that John was delivered up, he departed into Galilee: and having left Nazareth, he went and dwelt at Capernaum", verses 12,13. That is historical, and John undoubtedly had in mind that it would be a matter of time before the kingdom of heaven would be actually there, but it had drawn nigh. That is what I would understand.

W.R. Do you see that in relation to the magi? It seems that the star that the magi saw was held in relation to the mind of heaven.

J.T. That is another thought, and stresses what we are saying. The magi had the idea of the heavens;

they probably were astronomers; they belonged to the educated or, so to speak, higher class in the East, and they had seen Christ's star; not His mountain, or His river, or His sea; but His star; it was the star of the King of the Jews. Well, they understood; that is. God spoke to them in view of what is in mind. He spoke to them according to ideas they could understand. They could take in the idea of a star and that the Lord had a star; in fact. He holds the stars of Revelation 1, but this is His star. It must have been one such as would be intelligible to such persons as the magi.

A.N.W. In an earlier meeting, you linked the kingdom drawn nigh with another thought: The kingdom of God is among you. That would be in His Person, would it not?

J.T. Just so.

R.W.S. Would it be too much to say that each breath we take involves the expanse? Is that to have some moral counterpart in us?

J.T. Quite so; it shows it is the part of the heavens nearest to us.

A.P.T. It was said to Nebuchadnezzar, "Thou shalt be bathed with the dew of heaven", in contradistinction to the suggestion about the breath. Would there be a suggestion in that?

J.T. There is; in the use of the word breath there is more than the thought of heaven. We speak of the atmospheric heavens but that word atmospheric hardly goes so far as the use made of breath in Scripture, because we read of "the breath of God", and we read of the breath of the Lord Jesus; He breathed into the disciples. It is just to distinguish the use of words, which I think is important.

A.B.P. The luminaries in Genesis were set in the expanse of the heavens. Would that suggest that the will of God is carried out in these bodies that express the glory of God and show forth His handiwork?

J.T. That is what I was thinking. We have the ordinances of the heavens, and we have to do with ordinances of the earth, too. They all have the same sense, only the will of God is adhered to in the ordinances of the heavens, but we cannot say that of the ordinances down here, for some of them are of man.

F.N.W. It is remarkable how the star went before the magi and rested at Bethlehem.

J.T. Showing it was a matter of heavenly guidance.

F.N.W. "The stars from their courses" are referred to in Deborah's song.

J.T. Just so.

W.F.K. Would repentance, in chapter 3, make us kingdom subjects? It says, "Repent".

J.T. The word is "Repent, for the kingdom of the heavens has drawn nigh", chapter 3:2. There is a reason given why men should repent; that is, the kingdom of the heavens has drawn nigh, and, of course, it is a very urgent matter, because we cannot contend with the heavens; we cannot overcome them. Indeed, it says in Romans that the wrath of God is revealed from heaven, so that heaven is overpowering, and therefore there is every reason why men should repent in view of the coming of that kingdom.

A.R. Do you get a contrast between the thought of the kingdom of God and the kingdom of the heavens in Joseph's dream? The sheaves bowed down to him, but then the sun and the moon and the eleven stars bowed down to him also. Is that the idea of the two spheres?

J.T. It is. But it also carries with it the greatness of Christ; that not only the stars, but the sun and the moon, bow down to him. Hence principalities and powers are made subject to him. That is, not only men and women ruling people here on earth, but the principalities in the heavens bow down to him.

A.A.T. Did you not want to say something more about the Son of David?

J.T. I made reference to it in chapter 1, in the genealogy of Christ. It is very important, because it is the only one we have, properly, as peculiar to the King. It is a question of the King. Well, we have now reached the moral side, which is the side we want to stress, only I think what is said about Joseph is striking; that is, that he was a righteous man. That is one of the most important things that could be attached to a man down here; that he is righteous.

C.A.M. Are we to look at these names in the generations in relation to some feature of the work of God in each, and that they reach a certain objective?

J.T. You would be obliged to attach that idea to it, because God was in all these generations. Some that might be called generations are not in the list. That is, God is discriminating against certain ones, which is important. God does discriminate against persons who, from all appearances, should be in the list, but are not there, because God discriminates against unrighteousness.

C.A.M. That is a very remarkable thing. That raised the question in my mind, because we say that so many generations reached to Christ; that they go through a certain history but they reach Christ. That would be looking at the work of God abstractly in these generations.

J.T. It would. God was over all that. He took up Abraham. David is mentioned first because of kingship, but Abraham was the beginning of the generations here. We have a greater number in Luke, but as we have remarked, the importance of righteousness entering into these generations is a very great matter, and especially ecclesiastically, because God is concerned about assembly history. The word 'ecclesiastical' refers to what relates to the assembly. The question of righteousness is outstanding in relation to it; not only in ordinary matters such as business and the like, but assembly history, and in our relations with the assembly. Righteousness is predominant in it.

A.P.T. The Lord Jesus speaks in this gospel of "righteous Abel". It only occurs in Matthew.

J.T. That is characteristic. You get more about righteousness in Matthew than in any of the other gospels, and all this is in view of the assembly.

J.T.Jr. It is remarkable how much Peter speaks about righteousness. He speaks of Noah, as a preacher of it, and also of the way of righteousness. And he is brought into this gospel in special connection with the assembly.

J.T. Exactly; and his name signifies that he is material for the assembly. The Lord commits the keys of the kingdom of the heavens to Peter.

T.E.H. He finishes his second epistle with the idea of righteousness dwelling.

J.T. The reign refers to the millennium, and the dwelling is in eternal conditions where righteousness will dwell. The wilderness is where righteousness is carried out, in spite of difficulties, in spite of opposition.

A.N.W. Repentance is the element to it on our part.

J.T. That is just what we have in John's remark: "Now in those days comes John the baptist, preaching in the wilderness of Judaea, and saying. Repent, for the kingdom of the heavens has drawn nigh", verse 1. It is urgent; and in connection with this there is the matter of righteousness, whether it be ordinary matters or assembly matters.

A.B.P. There is a symmetry in reference to the generations -- three sets of fourteen. Is that idea of symmetry a sort of parallel to the thought of righteousness?

J.T. I suppose we could discover, if we were able to give time to it, that God was working out righteousness in these generations; and the number three is used in the types as a symbol of the development in anything. Sometimes it is seven. Three is a shorter way of dealing with a matter. Have I proven to be righteous in a reduced

plan of my life; in a small portion of it which God gave me in early days? Joseph would be a comparatively young man here, and the Spirit of God tells us that "Joseph, her husband, being a righteous man, and unwilling to expose her publicly, purposed to have put her away secretly; but while he pondered on these things, behold, an angel of the Lord appeared to him in a dream, saying, Joseph, son of David ...". His relation with David is noticed at once. God is giving him a great advantage to judge everything as to the circumstances he is in. They were delicate and complicated, and Satan would not fail to take advantage of them. But he is called son of David. "Joseph, son of David, fear not to take to thee Mary, thy wife, for that which is begotten in her is of the Holy Spirit", verses 19, 20. That is, he is aided in his righteousness, because God takes a man up if he is usable, and now he is aided in the position and maintains it fully as the sequel shows.

J.T.Jr. What happens in the assembly should be supported by righteousness; it should be righteous, should it not?

J.T. That is the point for us; righteousness should mark what is done in the assembly. In complicated cases we are tested. We all should understand Matthew in the light of righteousness. The history of the world is nothing compared with the history of the assembly, and the history of the testimony. It is there we should expect righteousness. It is seen in these forty-two generations; let us learn how it is worked out. The first trouble in the assembly was in the matter of food. The widows were being neglected. It seems that sectional prejudice entered into it -- "murmuring of the Hellenists against the Hebrews".

T.E.H. Would you help as to Jephthah: in New Testament language he became an assembly man, but earlier he had a lot of unrighteous matters to be dealt with in his own soul before he came forward.

J.T. Quite so; with most of us it is so, if we are to be anything for God in His service, we must especially work out righteousness, as we have been saying.

A.I. It says in chapter 5, "For I say unto you, that unless your righteousness surpass that of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no wise enter into the kingdom of the heavens", verse 20. How would you fit that in with what you are saying?

J.T. Christendom is marked by sects, and there may be differences if the question of righteousness arises. The Romish system, I would say, is the worst. The Lord suggests the idea of comparison as to righteousness. Therefore I would not regard a professed believer who is a Presbyterian as on the same level as a Romanist or Christian Scientist. We have to pay attention to grades because the idea of righteousness is graded.

A.R. Would you say Barnabas, in Acts 15, because he wanted to take Mark with him, involved fellowship? I wondered how that was to be regarded.

J.T. That would be more personal; there was not much principle involved. Mark was restored, and evidently Barnabas was too. There was really no ground for the cleavage; it was personal. But you will notice that the support of the brethren was with Paul. There is nothing said about Mark and Barnabas for a time. They lost ground, and that was serious. The general position was clear. Paul was approved and supported.

R.W.S. You have alluded a great deal recently to the Corinthian epistles. I was just noticing as to the working out of the evil seen in Corinth that almost the last injunction of Paul is "... that ye may do what is right", (2 Corinthians 13:7).

J.T. That is a weighty word to any local company. How often you hear, as to conditions of failure: Well, they are not any worse than others. That will do no good at all; it is a question of facts, involving what is right. Paul says, "Not that we may appear approved, but

that ye may do what is right, and we be as reprobates". That is the word for each of us: You see that you do what is right. In this sense it is no matter what others may do; let me see to myself that I am doing what is right; because heaven is looking on in each case.

A.A.T. At the beginning of the church's history, Ananias and Sapphira were examples of unrighteousness.

J.T. Yes. It was lying. Unrighteousness is a most important word in the divine vocabulary -- in a negative sense.

J.T.Jr. Nehemiah had to meet all sorts of things in maintaining righteousness, and he brought in the question of the God of the heavens in regard to the position, chapter 1:4.

J.T. So with Daniel; Nebuchadnezzar had to learn righteousness.

J.A.P. Is there a difference between righteousness considered in Romans and the righteousness that we get here?

J.T. Romans treats of imputed righteousness. It is most important as to Christian doctrine that righteousness is acquired primarily on the principle of faith, not works. In our scriptures we are dealing with practical righteousness. The Lord says, "For thus it becometh us to fulfil all righteousness", verse 15.

F.N.W. Is not Abraham an excellent example to bring forward in this gospel in relation to righteousness? The quotation in Romans 4:3 is identical with that in James 2:23. "Abraham believed God, and it was reckoned to him as righteousness". But in Romans 4 it is by faith; in James, he proved his faith by what he did in offering up Isaac; it says there that the scripture was fulfilled, as if it is substantial there.

A.MacD. Is it not remarkable in that connection that Abraham was met by Melchisedec, king of Salem, who is later called king of righteousness? This has a special touch.

J.T. Yes. He met Abraham. That was to distinguish Abraham. It was not only because he had imputed righteousness, by faith, but because he was practically righteous; he was waging war in righteousness. The fight was of God, like Deborah's, and Abraham took part in it -- not to take sides with any of the kings who were fighting, but to rescue his brother. He rescued Lot. That is the point.

A.N.W. You spoke just now of ecclesiastical righteousness. Would that be in mind in 2 Timothy 2:19 on the negative side, and termed "iniquity"? In the positive list, verse 22, the first principle is to follow righteousness. Is iniquity like ecclesiastical unrighteousness?

J.T. Quite so; I am glad you brought that up; because it is one of the leading points in the revival at the present time, the effect of which is going on and will go on to the end. The word is "Let every one who names the name of the Lord withdraw from iniquity". The allusion there, I believe, is to ecclesiastical unrighteousness, and there is much of it all the way down in the public history of the assembly.

E.A.L. Is this matter of withdrawing or separating from iniquity seen in Matthew 3, in the winnowing fan? Is the idea of winnowing separating the false from the true?

J.T. Quite so; there is the chaff and the real grain. You want to secure the grain. This is effected in "every one who names the name of the Lord" withdrawing from iniquity. And then after that is secured and the great principle of separation is established, the next thing is to follow righteousness. That is the first thing mentioned in the list; righteousness, faith, love and peace. And then the next thing is "with those that call upon the Lord out of a pure heart". All this indicates the way the present revival has come about; that God wrought in certain souls and they separated themselves

from evil. They had discovered the way back in those years alluded to. They were a group, of course, but a group in the sense of following righteousness, calling on the Lord out of a pure heart. You cannot complain about that, nor show in any way of reasoning that they are a sect. They are simply right, as following righteousness.

A.B.P. Would this character of righteousness enter into John's word in our chapter, "Make straight his paths", verse 3? Would that possibly terminate in the way that is seen in the Acts?

J.T. Just so. The word way is mentioned in that sense in chapter 9. It is significant that it is mentioned at the time of Paul's conversion. See note on Acts 9:2, New Translation.

A.B.P. And the idea of straight comes in at the beginning of Paul's history, "the street which is called Straight".

J.T. Quite so.

A.P.T. In 2 Corinthians 10, one says, "his letters ... are weighty and strong, but his presence in the body weak, and his speech naught", verse 10. Is that man moving in assembly righteousness?

J.T. A man saying these things against Paul! Do you not think he is the very opposite?

A.P.T. I think it is very serious to attack in this way those who serve the Lord.

R.W.S. John the baptist urgently forbade the Lord being baptised of him; was that commendable?

J.T. That brings up the leading point in this gospel. It comes in verse 13 of chapter 3: "Then comes Jesus from Galilee to the Jordan to John, to be baptised of him; but John urgently forbad him, saying, have need to be baptised of thee; and comest thou to me? But Jesus answering said to him. Suffer it now; for thus it becometh us to fulfil all righteousness. Then he suffers him", verses 13 - 15. It was a question not only of that particular item, but all righteousness.

D.P. Why did John take up the position in the wilderness instead of honouring the city with his presence?

J.T. That is a good question to raise. We have already remarked that it was not only in one desert, but in deserts, as if he did not avoid the idea of the wilderness. There are variations in wilderness conditions, and John seemed to take them all up, as if it were a curriculum he had to go through, for his great mission, so that he should be in the thing really, as involving suffering. We are told to endure suffering, and it is doubtful if any one of us can be of much service unless we have learned in our youth, and perhaps always, to endure suffering.

C.F.E. Do you think wilderness conditions call for dependence?

J.T. Yes. Here is a man born of a priestly family, having that distinction, and of course such distinctions can only hinder us if we make use of them. But John evidently did not, whether his mother and father saw to it, or whether it was his own desire. I think if we look at the first chapter of Luke, we shall see how it stands. His father had been dumb for some months until the promised son was born; and some one asked. What is the child to be named? It was thought that he should be named after his father, which is a natural thought, and so it says, "And they made signs to his father as to what he might wish it to be called. And having asked for a writing-table, he wrote saying, John is his name. And they all wondered", verses 62,63. And then we are told that "his mouth was opened immediately, and his tongue, and he spake, blessing God", verse 64. That is the first thing from his side. Zacharias, being filled with the Holy Spirit, prophesied most beautifully, as the brethren will know. Then later, it says, "The child grew and was strengthened in spirit; and he was in the deserts until the day of his shewing to Israel", verse 80. It is evident that he was to go through a course that would take him away

from what would promote natural instincts. Of course, he had such instincts, and desert conditions would tend to offset these; and thus, as under God's hand he would be rendered suitable for the great service opened up to him.

W.R. According to Matthew, John is very severe on the scribes and Pharisees.

J.T. Yes, and the Lord is especially so in chapter 23. But this matter of the deserts ought to be noted particularly because there are many young here, and if we aspire at all to have a part in the service of God, we have to accept that side of the position; not to cater for the natural side, for that which would feed the natural, but, as it were, to starve the natural appetites. John was in a position where he would be forced, as it were, to this great preserving feature. God is over that, to render him just what he needed to be, as a forerunner of Jesus. And the Lord, we may say, crowned the thought in saying to him, "Thus it becometh us to fulfil all righteousness". And so John suffered Him, meaning that he was already a disciple. He was a learner.

C.A.M. Referring again to "all righteousness", you were referring to imputed righteousness and the part faith has in it; it says in 1 John 2:29 that every one who practises righteousness is begotten of God. That has to do with our moral origin, does it not?

J.T. Quite so; the work of God in us is marked by that. He that is born of God practises righteousness; not exactly that he is told to do it, but he does it because he is born of God; he is like God.

C.A.M. Is it not remarkable that the prodigal said he had sinned against heaven? Would that be in line with what has been said as to righteousness?

J.T. The prodigal says, "I have sinned against heaven and before thee". That is, as you say, remarkable. Why did he speak about heaven? That is what came into the prodigal's mind. He had a right thought. He probably got it earlier, that heaven ruled; and not only

that, but heaven is beneficial. How could we get on without it, in view of the seasons and the effect of them on the earth, the supply of food and other needed things? We are sinning against it if we are wasteful and unthankful.

A.B.P. Are the heavenly bodies in their orbits a witness to obedience to the command of God?

J.T. I think so. The prodigal knew that he had sinned against heaven and sinned against God because of the bounty of heaven. How beneficial it was to him! He had money; his father was well off and had given him his living, and he went off and wasted it in riotous living. That is sinning against heaven. That is not what heaven does. It benefits those who are down here. And another thing is that manna, the food of the mighty (the mighty means the angels), represents the idea of heaven.

A.B.P. I wondered if the heavenly bodies, moving in their prescribed orbits, in righteousness, represent obedience to the word of God and should be considered as types of what we should be in obeying the truth.

J.T. I am sure that is right. And therefore the introduction of righteousness in Abraham's history answers to all that, because he is directed to look up to heaven. He is the heavenly man peculiarly because his generations are not given in Genesis. Abraham's generations are not mentioned; Isaac's and Jacob's are. There are about ten of them mentioned in Genesis, but his is not amongst them. I believe it is because he belongs to heaven; he is elevated in that way in the mind of God. Isaac is typically a heavenly man, too, but he is rather the heavenly man in testimony down here in relation with the assembly.

A.B.P. Is it significant that the term "the word of God" comes in first in relation to what was spoken to Abraham?

J.T. He is the first one of whom it is said that the word of God came to him. Genesis 15.

D.P. Why is Matthew so careful to establish the legality of the Lord's genealogy?

J.T. Well, it is most important for us because the legality of an assembly status applies today to those who are true to Christ. Matthew is the assembly gospel. It is the only gospel that treats formally of the assembly and hence the importance of righteousness. The word legality should be rightly understood. It is not the idea that is in mind when we speak of a legal man, or an exacting man. That is not what the word would mean as applied to Christ's genealogy and the facts relative to the assembly in Matthew. Using it in the sense before us is to establish the position of Christ as the Messiah of the Old Testament, and also as Head of the assembly. The facts furnished in Matthew establish all this incontestably. And I believe that is the point in Matthew, that the legality is established beyond question.

J.T.Jr. Matthew would require us to know something of Abraham and David in taking up his gospel. We need to know something of their histories and also something about John, because John is introduced immediately without giving us his birth.

J.T. Therefore, to apply this principle now to ecclesiastical history, it is important for us to understand the Reformation. It is not exactly a scriptural word, but it is a good word to cover the position and we all ought to see how the Reformation was established to be right; that is, the principle of justification by faith, and separation from the system of Rome. The Reformation resulted in the establishment of the thought of "justification by faith". That is Paul's great point in Romans; and what has been developed more recently, which relates not exactly to justification by faith, but to the assembly, the Spirit of God here and the formation of the assembly; the righteousness, or legality of that position has to be established. The word legality is used in the same sense in which it is applied to Matthew 1 to bring out the

righteousness of Christ's claim to the Messiahship; and so what happened a hundred and twenty-five years ago has to be shown to be right; to be legal. The position in which we are as walking together and meeting together as of the temple of God, all that attaches to the assembly; all that is most important, and the doctrine of it should be established.

C.A.M. Do you think that the generations from Babylon to Christ correspond to the present time? The Reformation really was the saints coming out of Babylon, do you think?

J.T. That is what happened. There was a certain amount of that in the Reformation. They did not go very far, because the clerical principle was carried with it, but in the more recent revival that was abandoned as wrong; the clerical principle was renounced in that. So it has been said that the notion of a clergyman is dispensationally a sin against the Holy Spirit. That is one of the strongest points we can have before us.

E.A.L. At the time of the Reformation the church of Rome wanted to establish that those who came out from it were legally wrong, but in truth they were morally right; that was the strength of their stand.

J.T. The letter to Thyatira deals with that -- "the rest in Thyatira". They were the separated ones that came out from Rome, and the Lord gives them promises. If we look at the end of Revelation 2, we shall see that. We have not time for it now, but the brethren ought to have it before them. It is the idea of separation.

F.N.W. During the last one hundred and twenty-five years there have been certain difficulties and divisions. What would you say establishes the legality of our position today?

J.T. One point negatively would be the clerical element. Over against that is the ground of gathering; hence, "Let every one who names the name of the Lord withdraw from iniquity ... and pursue righteousness,

faith, love, peace, with those that call upon the Lord out of a pure heart", (2 Timothy 2:19 - 22). How are we to bring that into the ecclesiastical position? Matthew 18 helps us, because there the Lord says, "Where two or three are gathered together unto my name, there am I in the midst of them", verse 20. The position is established in that way in two or three without a clergyman! The principle is the assembly meeting together, and going on together, governed by the Scriptures and recognising the Holy Spirit.

C.F.E. Going back to John the baptist again, would you say that he stands alone in his ministry? He is not linked on with others in his ministry.

J.T. He never was really. He says in John 3"He must increase, but I must decrease. He who comes from above is above all", verses 30, 31. Earlier he had said, "The friend of the bridegroom, who stands and hears him, rejoices in heart because of the voice of the bridegroom: this my joy then is fulfilled", verse 29. He finished there, you might say. He did not establish a system of his own at all. It was never intended that he d, although he made disciples, but he finished and disappeared in the acknowledgment of the glory of Christ. His joy was fulfilled in the thought that the Lord Jesus had the first place; indeed all the place.

A.R. Other gatherings of brethren today, I suppose, would claim the legal or right position.

J.T. The legal position is seen in the sense in which we are speaking, in what is right according to scripture. The genealogy here is established by law; that is, the facts presented in Scripture, as in the first chapter of Matthew. These names run down from Abraham to Christ, and He is proved to be the Messiah by what is stated, the Spirit of God inditing it. Chapter 4 shows what He is and what He can do. "And Jesus went round the whole of Galilee, teaching in their synagogues, and preaching the glad tidings of the kingdom, and healing

every disease and every bodily weakness among the people. And his fame went out into the whole of Syria, and they brought to him all that were ill, suffering under various diseases and pains, and those possessed by demons, and lunatics, and paralytics; and he healed them", verses 23, 24. Well, who could question His Messiahship? There it was! John sent messengers to Him later, asking, "Art thou the coming one? or are we to wait for another?" And He said, "Go, report to John what ye hear and see. Blind men see and lame walk; lepers are cleansed, and deaf hear; and dead are raised, and poor have glad tidings preached to them". (Matthew 11:4,5). That was the testimony. It is a question of what He was and His power. He went about doing good for God was with Him.

As regards ourselves; that is, the assembly now, 1 and 2 Corinthians apply particularly. Chapter 14 of 1 Corinthians supposes conditions in Corinth. Well, suppose there were three meetings there: one was a Jewish synagogue, one an idol temple, and the other a Christian assembly. What is to be said about these? A man comes into the Christian assembly. He may have gone into the others, too. What would he say about the heathen temple? What would he say about the Jewish synagogue? But what would he say about the Christian assembly? God is there. That is a legal point, and the evidence was that prophesying was going on. Men were prophesying, bringing God to souls; and the man who came in felt the power of that, and he fell down and worshipped God, and he reported that God was among them. That is the point. Let that be clear! Let us see to it that there is something like that, that God is among us.

A.A.T. Would you say that is the kingdom of the heavens?

J.T. That all enters into what we are saying; we are dealing with the kingdom of the heavens; that is power.

The kingdom is not meat and drink, but righteousness and peace and joy in the Holy Spirit and that is what we are dealing with. Righteousness is the leading feature in Matthew.

A.P.T. In the beginning of chapter 5, the legality of the Lord's position is maintained. It synchronises with 1 Corinthians 14. The blessing is where the Lord is. He says, "Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of the heavens". And then He follows on in a delightful way, the sequence of being in the atmosphere of the assembly.

J.T. The word 'blessed' is mentioned nine times. What really enters into the point of the assembly in 1 Corinthians 14 is that blessing is there in the power of the Spirit, operating in prophesying.

R.W.S. It is not sufficient to speak of good meetings or getting converts; that in itself does not establish the legality of the position at all.

J.T. That is the thing to look into because we know that thousands of people who are spoken of as converted are not real. In large evangelistic meetings this has been going on. But where is the formation resulting from such conversions? God is to be glorified in the assembly unto all generations of the age of ages, (Ephesians 3:21). And if those converts are not in the assembly what can we say of them?

J.H.H. Does Peter give a good word in Acts 10:34 when he says, "Of a truth I perceive that God is no respecter of persons, but in every nation he that fears him and works righteousness is acceptable to him"? Is that the legality we look for?

J.T. Very good; he that works righteousness.

W.F.K. What does "poor in spirit" mean?

J.T. It would be poor in the sense in which the Lord was poor. We may be poor in that sense although we have means in a literal sense. It is said, "Blessed is he that understandeth the poor". (Psalm 41:1), referring

undoubtedly to the Messiah. It is to be noted that the Lord is not spoken of as having money in His possession. He had to ask to be shown a penny, (Luke 20:24).

A.I. Would chapter 5 bear on the features of the kingdom?

J.T. Yes. The verses read speak of it; it is a question of teaching. It is really a legislative chapter. There are seven mountains mentioned in Matthew, and this chapter treats of one of them. Verse 1 says, "But seeing the crowds, he went up into the mountain, and having sat down, his disciples came to him; and, having opened his mouth, he taught them". We have this list of things that are mentioned, which are features of the kingdom. And so in the final passage we read, verse 44 to the end, we have the disciples likened to their Father; that is, to God. So the Lord says, "Love your enemies, bless those who curse you, do good to those who hate you, and pray for those who insult you and persecute you, that ye may be the sons of your Father who is in the heavens; for he makes his sun rise on evil and good, and sends rain on just and unjust. For if ye should love those who love you, what reward have ye? Do not also the tax-gatherers the same? And if ye should salute your brethren only, what do ye extraordinary? Do not also the Gentiles the same? Be ye therefore perfect as your heavenly Father is perfect". That is what is in heaven now -- par excellence The Father in His holy character is brought down to where we are; we are enjoined to reflect here below what God is.

W.R. Is it not a question of God being in us and among us?

J.T. The characteristics of God are to be seen in the brethren; those who are righteous; only it is here our heavenly Father; and He is called your Father.

J.A.P. Does this work out in Job? At the beginning he was speaking of his righteousness, but at the end he prayed for his friends.

J.T. Yes. That is real righteousness; just like what is before us -- he is like God.

A.I. Does teaching such as we are having at this time have in mind the thought of perfection?

J.T. That is what is stated: "Be ye therefore perfect as your heavenly Father is perfect". That is indeed a great idea, and it is brought down to ourselves.

C.F.E. It would seem as if there is an inner circle here; the crowds are not brought into it. "His disciples came to him".

J.T. "But seeing the crowds, he went up into the mountain, and having sat down, his disciples came to him", verse 1. The crowds did not go up there. The disciples went up. They thought it worth while and they went up; so with our meetings: relatively few come, but those that do come get instruction and blessing, generally.

A.B.P. Is it significant that this teaching was on the mountain? Is it in keeping with the idea of the heavens?

J.T. I think so; the teaching is connected with the thought of moral elevation. There are seven mountains in this gospel; we have often noticed that, like the mountains round about Jerusalem in the Psalms. There is more that has its bearing on us in this passage than has come under review. We are not to be militant in the literal sense; we do not want to take the sword. We may have to suffer for that, because we are not like other men. All that enters into the instruction of this chapter. We are to be like our Father, who is in heaven; and we are to bless those that curse us; that is the idea. We do not avenge ourselves: "... not avenging yourselves, beloved, ... for it is written. Vengeance belongs to me, I will recompense, saith the Lord", (Romans 12:19).

THE KINGDOM OF GOD (9)

Matthew 9:35 - 38; Matthew 10:1 - 7; Matthew 11:1 - 15; Matthew 12:28,29

J.T. It is proposed that we look again at the gospel of Matthew in pursuing our subject. We have previously considered certain parts from chapter 1 to the end of chapter 5. The kingdom of the heavens is peculiarly marked out in this gospel. We have, for instance, in the last paragraph of chapter 4, an allusion to the work of the Lord, involving the kingdom. It says, "And Jesus went round the whole of Galilee, teaching in their synagogues, and preaching the glad tidings of the kingdom, and healing every disease and every bodily weakness among the people. And his fame went out into the whole of Syria, and they brought to him all that were ill, suffering under various diseases and pains, and those possessed by demons, and lunatics, and paralytics; and he healed them", verses 23 - 25. And in chapter 9, which we have just read, there is a similar thought in the closing verses, only that there are certain variations, the Spirit of God calling attention to the extraordinary works of power of the Lord Jesus. All this enters into the idea of the kingdom, which is before us. And in chapter 12, the verses read, "But if by the Spirit of God cast out demons, then indeed the kingdom of God is come upon you. Or how can any one enter into the house of the strong man and plunder his goods, unless first he bind the strong man? and then he will plunder his house", verses 28, 29. And then, attached to these verses is another point of great importance, namely, a judicial or punitive feature which enters into this matter, because of a word or saying against the Spirit. In chapter 9 it says, "But the Pharisees said. He casts out the demons through the prince of the demons", verse 34. Another passage in chapter 12:24 is almost identical and alludes to the judgment of God upon any one speaking against the Spirit of God. The presence of the Spirit of God is the leading

feature of this dispensation. He is marked by peculiar humility in serving in God's kingdom -- serving men. So it is said in verse 31 of chapter 12: "For this reason I say unto you. Every sin and injurious speaking shall be forgiven to men, but speaking injuriously of the Spirit shall not be forgiven to men. And whosoever shall have spoken a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him; but whosoever shall speak against the Holy Spirit, it shall not be forgiven him, neither in tills age nor in the coming one". I think we do well to have these four scriptures before us, especially in view of the terrible word as to any one speaking against the Spirit of God. It is well known to many of us here that the great servant who was used of God to open up the truth to us, said that the notion of a clergyman is, dispensationally, a sin against the Holy Spirit.

J.S. Is that because the Spirit is quenched by clericalism?

J.T. I should think so. He is quenched in the usual procedure that marks the so-called sects at the present time, and of course it began very early in the dispensation. The clerical idea began early. It is seen in Diotrephes, 3 John 9.

C.F.E. Is that seen also in chapter 9:34, in the Pharisees denying the power of God?

J.T. Yes. "The Pharisees said. He casts out the demons through the prince of the demons". That is the allegation: that the Lord Jesus was acting in the power of an evil spirit, and that was a word against the Spirit of God.

A.B.P. Is it important that we discern, in any matters that come up amongst us, if the dispensation has been misrepresented?

J.T. I should think that would enter into what we are saying, and we are reminded therefore of how easily we may participate in what is, in effect, a sin against the Spirit. Therefore we are enjoined not to quench the

Spirit and not to grieve the Holy Spirit. Quenching the Spirit would be trenching on His activities and thus sinning against Him.

A.B.P. Was the sin of Moses, which in one sense was provoked by the people, a serious matter because it misrepresented the dispensation?

J.T. Well, it hindered his entrance into the land, his leading Israel in, but it did not affect the Spirit (typically) for the water flowed out to the people. The action affected Moses and Aaron governmentally, but not in a final sense, for their places in the testimony and in blessing are fixed eternally. But as to this dispensation, it is the time of the throne of grace instead of the Lord's own throne, which will involve judgment. In general this dispensation is characterised by grace, it is "the well accepted time", "the day of salvation". But the question arises as to the general current situation in the world, involving also happenings of the last war and some earlier wars -- certain efforts which were tantamount to antichristian attack on military lines -- and the question is, are they to be regarded as subject to the punitive dealings of God as entering into the character of the last days, corresponding to what is described in the book of Revelation in the form of judgments. If judgments entered into this dispensation at the beginning, and indeed throughout, as might be pointed out in various events, why may not the present circumstances come under that head? Whether the conduct that has marked current matters, and especially of late, should be called governmental or purely punitive, they certainly have the character of early events, such as the destruction of Jerusalem and the extraordinary death of Herod. These cannot but be regarded as punitive, only they do not characterise the dispensation, though entering into it.

A.R. What about the sin unto death in John's first epistle? Would that fit in here?

J.T. I should not call that a punitive sin in the sense

in which we are speaking. Such a sin might be in a person who is really one of God's people, such as Ananias and Sapphira, and certain others that are spoken of at Corinth: "On this account many among you are weak and infirm, and a good many are fallen asleep", (1 Corinthians 11:30). I would regard those cases as purely governmental, not punitive.

A.N.W. In tracing these matters you have referred to in relation to the kingdom, are you giving it a wider bearing than the assembly?

J.T. One of the assembly's prerogatives is to exercise discipline -- perhaps more accurately, governmental acts -- in order that the persons involved might be saved in the day of the Lord. They are not merely punitive; they are mainly corrective. The assembly, through Peter, dealt with Ananias and Sapphira. The physical effect, death, was evidently the act of God, although Peter identified himself with it in announcing it. The Old Testament required corporal punishment in maintaining the government of God in Israel, but it is not applied in the assembly. Delivering to Satan and putting away are divinely prescribed, but the cases of Ananias and Sapphira and those at Corinth were direct acts of God. So that there are remarkable expressions and distinctions in Scripture that we should notice, and know how to judge when we meet them. Christians ought to be on their guard lest they may be in any way supporting what is antichristian and so come under the penalty of God. In recent circumstances some indulged in national and personal prejudices and compromised themselves in this way.

A.A.T. Is it not so that the Galatian saints were going back to Judaism and in that way sinning against the Spirit?

J.T. They were in danger, but the apostle addresses them as Christians. There were persons, who were Judaisers, who troubled them, and the apostle says, "I

would that they would even cut themselves off who throw you into confusion". (Galatians 5:12). But he does not suggest that all were guilty; those who were direct Judaisers were guilty; that is, as bringing in apostate principles. They brought in Old Testament conditions as governing this present dispensation. Christendom today is largely thus affected.

R.W.S. Are you connecting the kingdom with present happenings? I think I followed what you said as to the assembly, but are you connecting present public happenings with the operations of the kingdom?

J.T. No; they would not be, because the kingdom is not characteristically punitive, as we have said. "For the kingdom of God is not eating and drinking, but righteousness, and peace, and joy in the Holy Spirit", (Romans 14:17). Therefore, what we have read here and what generally characterises the kingdom of God is the gospel. It is grace; now grace reigns "through righteousness to eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord", (Romans 5:21).

R.W.S. Does that same thought apply to the kingdom of the heavens?

J.T. Yes. We are engaged with the kingdom of the heavens now, in Matthew; the idea of Christ being in heaven is implied. It is His present service in heaven that is in mind, and what flows out of it. Other features that we have been considering, especially in Luke, relate to the kingdom connected with the Spirit on earth, which is the same thing in result, but still, there are the two thoughts. The presence of the Spirit on earth is the idea that is conveyed in the kingdom of God. "But if I by the Spirit of God cast out demons, then indeed the kingdom of God is come upon you". Therefore, Luke tells us that the Lord Jesus went about doing good. That was the idea of the kingdom; God being with Him.

C.A.M. Would it be right to look at the kingdom as

not universally acknowledged at the present time? It has its own wonderful sphere, but there are spheres exterior to it, so that these other operations of God in judicial matters, of which you were speaking, would exercise themselves in those surroundings. The words that occur to me are, "in the midst of you", (Luke 17:20,21). There is something surrounding the kingdom of God that is in measure subject to the government of God.

J.T. I see your point; that is, not characteristically subject to the government of God, but it might be in some detail.

C.A.M. I was wondering whether the pharisaical element that the Lord is speaking of continues on in the clerical element today.

J.T. Quite so; hence the whole system of religion that has developed and now has to be classified with heathendom, Judaism, and even Mohammedanism. Can God in any sense be favourable to it? I think that under certain circumstances He can be, in a governmental sense; and that this is illustrated in the present international combinations.

J.A.P. Does the prophecy in Zechariah 4 bear out what you are saying as to the kingdom of God -- how it is actually supported? It says, "Not by might, nor by power, but by my Spirit, saith Jehovah of hosts ... and he shall bring forth the headstone with shoutings: Grace, grace unto it!" verses 6,7. And then, "These are the two sons of oil, that stand before the Lord of the whole earth", verse 14. Is that a suggestion of the Spirit coming in?

J.T. I think so, as giving character to the present time. Haggai agrees somewhat with that. Jehovah says, "The word that I covenanted with you when ye came out of Egypt, and my Spirit, remain among you", (Haggai 2:5). That, of course, would be beneficial -- it is Horeb, not Sinai. That, I think, would be Jehovah's way of showing how near the kingdom in the previous

dispensation came to our dispensation from the standpoint of good.

A.R. In 2 Thessalonians reference is made to that which restrains, and he who restrains. Is that restraint against the spirit of antichrist? The spirit of antichrist seems to be prevalent in the present war, but there is a power holding against it.

J.T. Yes: that which restrains, and he who restrains has to be noted, and I would say that the latter refers to the Spirit; whereas that which restrains, I would say, is the principle of government that God inaugurated after Israel was set aside; that is, what God has set up in the four monarchies. That still stands as a principle with God, and of course it comes into our cognisance, because we are called upon to pray for those whom God has set up -- "the powers that be", (Romans 13:1).

A.R. Do you mean that which hinders would be the governments on earth that are favourable to Christianity?

J.T. In general; they are not always favourable to Christianity, but they are helped of God to keep order, maintaining government generally. We thank God for it constantly now. And beside that there is that which resists evil in the prayers of the saints and the general working of the Spirit in the assembly.

A.B.P. Should we not make room in our thoughts for God to act in His own rights outside of the bounds of the present dispensation in individual cases, or even in certain national matters?

J.T. I would say that, because "The heavens declare the glory of God; and the expanse sheweth the work of his hands". (Psalm 19:1). And then it goes on to say, "There is no speech, and there are no words, yet their voice is heard", verse 3. That psalm speaks of a testimony through which God can speak to man, and we know He did speak to the magi from the East, for example. They were spoken to through a star; through the heavens. That, I am sure, goes on.

H.G.H. Is that suggested in verse 36? It says, "When he saw the crowds ..." Earlier, He was healing every disease, but when He saw the crowds He was moved with compassion for them. There were specific movements in relation to the healing of the diseases, but then there were crowds which would imply those outside of His immediate circle, but He had compassion for them.

J.T. All that helps as to what has been said as to spheres exterior to the kingdom of heaven. Chapter 9:35 speaks of what He was doing -- how immense it was! And then in verse 36, He was moved because He saw that the people were harassed and cast away as sheep not having a shepherd. He was the Shepherd of Israel, but He does not say that here. What He says is, "The harvest is great and the workmen are few; supplicate therefore the Lord of the harvest, that he send forth workmen unto his harvest". And then He appoints the apostles. They were to carry on as He had been carrying on, but within the limits of Israel. Another thing thus comes up in our subject. Can we discern modification when it is required? We shall see it further in the next chapter, but here they are told to go to the house of Israel; not to the Samaritans. And they are told that their service would continue on until the Lord comes. We cannot, of course, admit of the exclusion of Christianity; we come on to it in chapters 11 and 12, as we shall see, but I think we may see that the presence of the twelve is stressed here, and that they are to be limited to the tribes of Israel. The designation "twelve" implies that they represent administration; verse 2 emphasises this. The legislative side being so far in the Lord's hands, is seen in chapters 5, 6, and 7. In chapter 10 the twelve are called "twelve disciples", which alludes to their education, it being derived from the Lord and thus it qualified them for their service, carrying also the administrative idea, as we have seen. And then verse 2

says, "Now the names of the twelve apostles are these ..." Notice, the word is changed to apostles and their names are given; and then again in verse 5 it says, "These twelve Jesus sent out when he had charged them". That is to say, it is a great administrative position under the three designations here: "twelve disciples", and "twelve apostles", and "these twelve". It becomes very interesting as to how the kingdom took form under the twelve, as it had taken form under the Lord Himself. We shall see presently that John the baptist was not in the kingdom as the Lord was now setting it up. He was not equal to it. "A little one in the kingdom of the heavens is greater than he", chapter 11: 11.