Colossians 1:1 - 29

J.T. The features of the truth presented in the epistle to the Colossians are well known to the brethren, at least it is assumed that they are well known, but it is hoped that certain features that have not been stressed may come before us at this time, and particularly the idea of hope; then the personal side is pronounced in the epistle. Paul's own feeling and thoughts, personal thoughts, are brought forward, he not having seen the saints at Colosse; a peculiar matter, which, of course, would apply at the present time to us. We cannot speak of any links with apostolic ministry, or even with such ministry as has an apostolic character; none of us can speak much of this. The occasion therefore has to be one amongst us who know each other, and specially the younger men, many of whom have been travelling under the government of God, and have come in touch with the brethren elsewhere. The knowledge we thus have of each other is, in this sense, considerably enlarged, as compared with earlier days. It is well to keep this in mind that we are not so far away from each other in the physical sense as we used to be.

Then the names mentioned by the apostle, such as Epaphras and others, are to be noted, especially some of them who are outstanding, one of them known to the Colossians as one of themselves. The personal side therefore is important, especially if it is spiritual. Spirituality enters into our personal acquaintance with each other, and the knowledge that many of us have acquired through the recent governmental circumstances of the wars. All this would be in mind, and especially with such a man as Epaphras who was one of them, and was marked by combat for the truth and for them.

The apostle's opening word is characteristic, "Paul, apostle of Christ Jesus, by God's will, and Timotheus the brother, to the holy and faithful brethren in Christ which are in Colosse", and then he says, "We give thanks to the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ continually when praying for you, having heard" (that is, what he has to say was based on testimony rendered to him by others) "having heard of your faith in Christ Jesus, and the love which ye have towards all the saints, on account of the hope which is laid up for you in the heavens; of which ye heard before in the word of the truth of the glad tidings, which are come to you, as they are in all the world, and are bearing fruit and growing, even as also among you, from the day ye heard them and knew indeed the grace of God, in truth: even as ye learned from Epaphras our beloved fellow-bondman, who is a faithful minister of Christ for you, who has also manifested to us your love in the Spirit". I have just read this section to bring out the personal side, and how it was seen in Epaphras. He is mentioned later, showing how important a personality he was in the apostle's mind, and that there are such persons who are reliable and have influence and have care for the local position. It is a matter of the first importance that the local position should be properly cared for, and that brethren who have ability and gift should not forget that the local position in each place has to be maintained.

W.H. Would this reference to Timotheus "the brother" bear on the character of the epistle definitely as opening up the features of the Christian circle?

J.T. Quite so; he is called the brother, as if the term brother applied peculiarly to him.

A.Al. Was not Timotheus himself personally introduced in that way as one who was "well reported of by the brethren that were at Lystra and Iconium"? Acts 16:2.

J. T. He is brought forward at first on those lines and is particularly noted as one of whom there was a

good report locally. The idea of universal service, or servants, is in the Scriptures, but generally, even in Paul and Barnabas, the local position is maintained. After their first journey of service they returned to Antioch and remained a considerable time with the brethren, as if to establish the importance of the local principle and that it was not to be overshadowed even by gift. Each is to have his part in it, because Corinthians, which is the scripture that bears on that point, stresses the importance of the local position, "the assembly of God which is in Corinth". We do not get it here or in Ephesus, so much; it is Corinth that is in mind. Just now it is a question of Colosse and the personnel mentioned, showing that one of themselves is marked by spiritual feelings and concern about the local position.

Ques. Would you look for a sober recognition of the government of God as entering into our localities; placing us there with a view to filling out our part in it, and strengthening what is of God in the place?

J.T. Just so. The military circumstances that have preceded us are not to be overlooked, because the two wars were not simply accidental. They have to do with the government of God, and the bearing of the government of God on the saints, especially the young men, is to be noted.

H.Bd. Would what is said as to Samuel help? It says, "his return was to Ramah; for there was his house, and there he judged Israel".

J.T. It would indeed. "There was his house". As we have it even again in Corinthians, "have ye not houses to eat and to drink in?". The bearing of the house on the assembly position is in mind and it is striking that it should appear as early as Samuel. He had a regular circuit and although some of his family did not turn out too well, yet he did not forget his house.

M.A.W. Is the importance of "one of you" in the last chapter striking as linking on with the local thought?

"Onesimus ... who is one of you" and "Epaphras, who is one of you".

J.T. Just so; he was one of them. So that he represents what we are speaking of, the importance of the local position. The epistle to Philemon bears on all this.

Ques. Would the mention of the elderhood in relation to Timothy's gift also bear this out and stress the importance of the local position?

J.T. His gift, of course, was connected with Paul too, but the elderhood is important and it bears on what we are saying, because the elders are never regarded as universal; they are properly local. They are first mentioned peculiarly in Acts 14, where the apostles Paul and Barnabas chose elders in each assembly, showing that in their minds the local position was to be properly cared for.

W.S.S. Epaphras would seem to be one who had cared for the local position, and in consequence found himself linked with the apostle in his universal service.

J.T. That is just what we were saying, that he was one of them that clearly cared for the local position, he combated for them. Evidently he or someone must have told Paul about the general position at Colosse, and it was to strengthen it that the epistle was written. The epistles to Corinth begin with the local position and continue on to the universal position. The apostle saying, "Thus I ordain in all the assemblies", refers to the universal position, which is to be marked by general unity and not independency. Therefore the customs are to be the same in every assembly, which is one of the most important things that can be mentioned; the idea of general unity in what we are saying and what we teach, and what we do, in our localities.

P.L. Would the princes of the tribes in Numbers illustrate that unity, as each attached to a locality contributed to what is universal?

J. T. They represent that very idea, for the princes would be influential and would influence all below them for good and for unity.

Ques. Would Philemon show the link between the two sides when it says, "the assembly which is in thine house"?

J.T. Well, that is good. It says, "Paul, prisoner of Christ Jesus, and Timotheus the brother, to Philemon the beloved and our fellow-workman, and to the sister Apphia and to Archippus our fellow-soldier, and to the assembly which is in thine house", that is to say, Philemon's house, "Grace to you and peace from God our Father, and the Lord Jesus Christ". So that the position is maintained there, and the nearness of Philemon's position to Colosse is in mind.

P.H.H. Is the question of testimony important, Paul having had the report of what was going on in Colosse by way of accredited testimony? As we hear reports from one locality and another, are we to receive them as accredited testimony?

J.T. It is important to be sure that whatever becomes current in the way of information should be accredited; hence Corinthians stresses "in the mouth of two or three witnesses", and so does Matthew. Therefore whatever is circulated in the sense of information, either as to the work of God, or as to the personnel of the service, should be accredited before circulation.

A.R. The apostle Paul says to the Corinthians, "It hath been declared unto me ... by them which are of the house of Chloe". She evidently reported to the apostle and he speaks of that when writing to them.

J.T. He uses the expression "reported commonly" later, but that common report would be accredited in his mind, I am certain, and so would that be from the house of Chloe. Chloe was evidently a woman and she was reliable, such as Phoebe. Sisters are specially in mind for reliability, that they should be reliable in what they may say.

E.B. How do you account for the inaccuracy of the report that went out at the end of John's gospel?

J.T. Well, that is to be noted too, but the Spirit of God records what Jesus did not say. If John 21 be an appendix, then it makes it all the more important that the truth should be fully accredited, and now that we have come to the end of the dispensation it is most important that nothing is given out that is not accurate. We often refer to the Bereans, and that one of them was in Paul's company, according to Acts 20, as if the apostle would have such a one as that to correct anything that is not according to Scripture. Sometimes notions or thoughts that are given out, it may be at local readings, are circulated and found to be inaccurate and, in fact, untrue, hence the importance of having a Berean or the spirit of the Bereans in our local meetings.

Rem. It is said in Deuteronomy, that if certain things are reported, we are to make diligent search before we accept them.

A. M. Does the quality of faithfulness, so stressed by Paul, therefore apply not only to persons, but to words?

J.T. So that if a report is circulated, the words ought to be carefully analysed. We have already alluded to the expression in John 21, "Jesus did not say". The Lord is dealing with a special minister that He had in mind, a nameless one so far, at least according to what He said. It was John, of course, "the disciple whom Jesus loved". The Lord had in mind to keep him in reserve, to be used at any time, whether it be he actually or the spirit of what he represents. He was one to be used at any time to bring out some particular feature of the truth. The Lord would stress the need for accuracy in such matters.

Rem. Reverting to the support of the testimony in the locality, there is a rather remarkable verse in 1 Samuel, which perhaps would bear upon it. It says,

"Behold now, a man of God is in this city, and the man is held in honour; all that he says comes surely to pass. Let us now go thither: perhaps he will show us the way that we should go", 1 Samuel 9:6. I was thinking that was a striking testimony to what was in the city.

J.T. Quite so. And then the young women, how they were able to tell Saul and his servant where the man of God was. They know, showing the importance of sisters knowing in these matters. As to Colossians, the matter of the brother which was brought forward, "Timotheus the brother", then "the holy and faithful brethren in Christ which are in Colosse", the idea of holiness attaching to the brethren, as well as faithfulness. I am only alluding to the actual wording of the introductory address of Paul, and then what he gives thanks for. His word runs on to the hope, in verse 5, "on account of the hope which is laid up for you in the heavens". The word "heavens" is here viewed in the sense of what heaven really is, not the expanse, which would include other things. The word "heavens" here, as coming up in the New Testament, would allude to heaven itself, and what heaven is in regard to matters we are speaking of, but as to the expanse, we have to bear in mind that we have other things besides what is good in the expanse. It says in Genesis 1, "God called the expanse Heavens", but we have to bear in mind that it is more general. Here the hope is not in the expanse, it is in the heavens, laid up in the heavens for the Colossians.

Ques. Had you in mind that the hope in this connection is limited definitely to the place the assembly has and not any other heavenly family?

J.T. I would think so. It says, "for you"; that is to say, we have to keep in mind who is spoken of and whether the Colossians are viewed simply as a local company or whether they really represent the gentiles, which they do. So what is said to be reserved in the heavens is for the gentiles, I would think. The Jews

are contemplated as well as the gentiles in Ephesians, but Colossians shows that the gentiles are not at any disadvantage, because the hope is for them, and it is laid up in the heavens, meaning that it is where it is reserved and preserved for them, only they have to come to it. It is a question now of where they are and what God has wrought in them because the epistle depends on what is wrought in us, not only the objective side of things, but what is wrought in us, so that we have means in ourselves of affecting ourselves.

H.F.N. Would you give us a little help in regard to the three fold way the hope is brought in: the reference here to "the hope ... laid up ... in the heavens", then "the hope of the glad tidings", and finally "Christ in you the hope of glory".

J.T. I am glad you bring that forward. The three-fold thought as brought in here in this epistle of hope, may be compared with the Thessalonians. It does not say that the Colossians had given it up. In the second epistle to the Thessalonians the idea of hope is dropped, whereas in the first epistle it is found, and here it is found three times. I think that it should be specially stressed that hope should mark us, because things are gradually getting worse in the world and the brethren need to be buoyed up by hope. There are going to be better things for us, but we have to wait for them. "What a man sees", that is the present situation, political, industrial, social or whatever it be, but it is not affording anything, especially for young men and young women. All this is intended, because really God would give the youth to understand that He is thinking of them, and they may count on God anyway to come in for them circumstantially in view of certain things, such as marriage and the like, but on the whole what is so specially needed for all of us, I believe, is the idea of hope. There is little or nothing to be expected here, and so the question is as to whether we are resting in hope.

H.F.N. Would it be right to link the first reference to hope with the thought of sonship, and the second with the thought of the inheritance? Then would "Christ in you the hope of glory" be the distinctive feature of the Colossian side of the mystery?

J.T. Quite so. God is not spreading things out for unconverted people or even merely religious people. It is a mystery. The hope that we are trusting to involves mystery. And so we are to be instructed in mystery, and hence the need specially of reading Matthew.

E.J.M. Is it a matter for our encouragement that God is pleased to associate Himself with us as the God of hope? "The God of hope fill you with all joy and peace in believing", Romans 15:13.

J.T. I was thinking of that as what you would expect in Romans; that is to say, the fundamental truth, especially for the young. So "hope does not make ashamed, because the love of God is shed abroad in our hearts by the Holy Spirit", a very great and comforting thought, a fundamental thought. So young people are to be established in the truth as to hope. I thought I should add that.

Ques. Would hope make us heavenly?

J.T. Well, it does, it is connected with heaven here.

W.C. Would that link on with chapter 3, "seek the things which are above"? If we hope for them we would seek them.

J.T. Quite so, "where the Christ is". Hope, as in Romans, is a fundamental thought, and it does not make ashamed, because God recompenses us as to what we may speak of as our hope, by the fact that His love is in our hearts. It is not viewed as in heaven, it is in our hearts, "shed abroad in our hearts by the Holy Spirit which has been given to us".

P.H.H. Would it correspond at all to the book of Deuteronomy? I was thinking that the position of the children of Israel as they stood in the plains of Moab

looking across the Jordan, corresponded a little with our present position. Moses takes advantage of that, somewhat like Paul here, to speak of the attractive features of the land so as to get the people's hearts engaged with it.

J. T. It is not the easterly outlook that is stressed, but what is over Jordan, that is to say what any one of us may come to, certainly if we are advanced in years. We have to prepare ourselves for, perhaps, departing to be with Christ, and it is said to be "far better". So that we are not disconsolate nor discouraged by anything, even if it be serious illness, but we are occupied with what is over Jordan. In principle it is the land. The Lord, when He said to the thief, "Today shalt thou be with me in paradise", implied that the thing would be very blessed, it would be a blessed condition. That is very wonderful, I think. And so it is that any one of us may be called to depart to be with Christ, but let us have the hope too, that is to say the hope of a better condition.

A.Al. The apostle brings in hope in 1 Corinthians 13 as one of the things that abide. "Now abide faith, hope, love; these three things".

Ques. Was the hope linked with their love to all the saints? It says, "and the love which ye have towards all the saints". We are going to dwell with all the saints eternally, would not that help us to love them now?

J.T. Yes, but we are going to dwell with Christ immediately. It is just as well for us to be practical, for if we are going to be "with Christ", it is immediate, even if we are old or young. It is not a question of joining the throng, it is a question of being with Christ; so that it is a better thing, and that would make us more cheerful and stress the thought of hope; already hope is in the matter.

L.E.S. It is said of Abraham, "who against hope believed in hope to his becoming father of many nations, according to that which was spoken, So shall thy seed be".

Would that link on with the Colossian epistle in regard to the nations?

J. T. Quite so, and it is not what we see, as it says, "For what a man seeth, why doth he yet hope for?". Hope refers to what is not seen, and so we should be encouraged as to this point. Whilst there is the great and glorious thought that we are to join the heavenly, the ransomed throng, as we say, and to enter into the actual fact of sonship, because sonship is implied in the full thought of salvation in Romans 8, yet there is that which precedes that, namely what we may hope for in joining the Lord. He says to the thief, "Today shalt thou be with me in paradise". That is something to think of. Paul said in 2 Corinthians 12 that he did not know whether he was in the body or out of it. But he was in paradise, and that was a truth that he would bring into his ministry. So that those who arc ministering, even if old, have hope in what is immediate, in view of the Lord's coming or of His taking them to be with Him at any time.

W.H. So the apostle says, "we are ... pleased rather to be absent from the body and present with the Lord", 2 Corinthians 5:8.

J.T. Quite so. The immediate thought of what the Lord will do for us pending the full end of the dispensation is to be before us; that He is thinking of us in view, of what is better, is something that very many need to be encouraged with. That brings an element of joy too, but many of us, perhaps, are not very much accustomed to joy in our experience. This may be especially so if we are ministers or gifted men, for we are apt to rest in our gift and what we are doing, whereas the joy lies in what we are coming into, the better things.

Ques. Is this in any way set forth in Caleb when he says, "I brought him word again as it was in my heart"? Was hope there livingly?

J.T. Then he realised it at the end. When he was eighty-five he was equal to what he had been at forty-five

or forty. Therefore what we are saying as to our having joy in our hearts is very important, especially for those of us who are older. The Lord would say, There is plenty of joy, why not have it? It is all bound up with the Lord's doings. Whatever He may do for us, He has us in His mind, so that we may have joy now, as well as the joy that comes in with our departure to be with Him.

Ques. Reference was made a moment or two ago to faith, hope and love. Would it be out of place to ask what is the difference between faith and hope?

J.T. Well, it is a very good question. We speak more of faith, perhaps, than we speak of hope. While faith is fundamental as to the truth and as to the ministry, hope is intended to stimulate us before things become visible, as it says, "Our light affliction, which is but for a moment, worketh for us a far more exceeding and eternal weight of glory". That is to be in our hearts in view of possible dissolution.

Ques. Have you in mind that faith is on the principle of light, while hope is really something arrived at in the way of enjoyment?

J.T. Well, I think hope really involves promise. The promises are very tangible. The Lord says to Philadelphia, "I also will keep thee out of the hour of trial, which is about to come upon the whole habitable world, to try them that dwell upon the earth". That we are to be taken out of the great tribulation is a promise which I believe the brethren are coming to see. The fact that the Lord has made that promise, as well as other promises, is an element that affords satisfaction and joy. Then, what you say enters into Romans, as has already been remarked; that is to say, "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". The thing is in our hearts, but it is based on promise, and, of course, on light too, as it says, "The things which are seen are temporal; but the things that

are not seen are eternal", and these all occasion hope and encouragement and joy.

A.Al. Do not the two terms "faith" and "hope" seem to blend into one in 1 Corinthians 13, where it says, "the greater of these is love", as if love is over against the other two joined together?

J.T. Love is the greater. It is not superlative, it is comparative. The comparison is between faith and hope, but love abides, for love is eternal. It is not based on anything in a sense; it is what God is, and what the Holy Spirit sheds abroad in our hearts.

A.N.W. Is faith particularly connected with Abraham, whereas hope more with Sarah? It says she "hoped in God".

J.T. Abraham "looked for a city which hath foundations, whose builder and maker is God". He looked for that and that was a hope. But now we have to come back to the question raised as to the difference between faith and hope. Faith is by report; that is the way it is put in Romans, "Faith then is by a report, but the report by God's word". Then we have what is said about hope also in Romans. Faith is a report which our souls rest in, but hope is clearly additional as something to affect us in a moral way. There is such a thing as what is unseen affording joy, and hope covers all that, for what is not seen is eternal. The soul thus learns to live in hope in that sense.

E.J.M. Is hope linked with the progressive reception of the truth as in Romans 15? It says, "Now the God of hope fill you with all joy and peace in believing, so that ye should abound in hope".

J.T. Just so, it is a question of the power of the Holy Spirit, for things are all in the Spirit.

Rem. The sojourners of the dispersion had lost everything so far as what was material and earthly was concerned, but the apostle writes to them and says, "Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who, according to his great mercy, has begotten us again

to a living hope through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from among the dead", 1 Peter 1:3.

J.T. "A living hope", not simply hope, but a living one, which is just a strengthening thought.

Ques. Would it be right to bring forward the first verse of Hebrews 11, "faith is the substantiating of things hoped for"?

J.T. That shows that faith and hope are intimately linked together. Faith, of course, is the great fundamental thought and gathers up everything, you might say, in itself, but then when we specialise, we have to come to love, and see that it is greater than the other two. That is to say, it is the great essential thing that emanates from God.

E.G. Peter in his first epistle says, "whom, having not seen, ye love; on whom though not now looking, but believing, ye exult with joy unspeakable and filled with the glory".

J.T. That is intelligible, in view of Peter's writing to the saints of the dispersion. He was the apostle of the circumcision, but they were dispersed, which would mean that they were suffering, and he encourages them in that way. "Filled with the glory", as it goes on to say, would imply the Spirit, of course. So that the Jewish Christians in that day would be filled with the glory, but the glory as faith would lay hold of it through the gospel.

S.B. Would it be right to bring the blessed Lord into this question of hope? It is said of Him in Psalm 22, "thou didst make me hope when I was upon my mother's breasts", and then it says in Hebrews, "who for the joy that was set before him endured the cross, despising the shame". The word hope is not used there, but is it not very much implied?

J.T. The joy coming in there, and the Lord Himself saying that He had been made to hope, is very remarkable; the joy that was set before Him, showing that the Lord Jesus Himself as Man entered into all these matters; He leads in them.

A.Al. Is that seen too in Psalm 16, "my flesh also shall rest in hope. For thou wilt not leave my soul in hell; neither wilt thou suffer thine Holy One to see corruption. Thou wilt show me the path of life: in thy presence is fulness of joy; at thy right hand there are pleasures for evermore"?

J.T. These are Psalms, of course, that the saint feeds on, as furnishing food from the experience of Christ, but they arc not on the level of Colossians and Ephesians.

E.C.M. Does the word, "the word of the truth of the glad tidings", involve the hope that you have dwelt on?

J. T. It does. It shows how the gospel is blended into all these matters. The Colossians were gentiles, they were not such as Peter wrote to, the saints of the dispersion, the gentiles are not viewed as dispersed. We are just set here and God has converted us here where we are and we have to battle with the world as it is. We are not in the Jews' position, we are gentiles, and we get here the elements of the gospel involving what we need, that is, joy in our hearts through faith.

A.W.G.T. Is not that confirmed in relation to the gentiles in Ephesians 2 where we are said to have "no hope"?

J.T. That is, of course, over against what the believer has. Ephesians contemplates the Jew and the gentile. We shall come to that later, no doubt; but now we are dealing, for the moment, with the gentiles represented in the Colossian assembly, and what the gentiles had through the gospel. So we have in verse 6, "bearing fruit and growing, even as also among you, from the day ye heard them and knew indeed the grace of God, in truth: even as ye learned from Epaphras".

P.H.H. Does it raise at all the question of the type of gospel nowadays, whether there is a peculiarly heavenly touch in the preaching such as is known amongst us?

J.T. I believe the custom that the Lord has brought about of the brethren having prayer in their houses in view of their gospel testimony on the Lord's day evenings, would tend to bring about a higher level of the gospel testimony. Usually, we have to say that most of the hearers are already saints, or the children of saints, and it is all the more necessary that we should preach a full gospel, which would mean that the young people are to be encouraged in the line of hope. The gospel involves hope, the hope that makes not ashamed, because of the tangible thing, that is, the love of God shed abroad in our hearts and by no less a person than the Holy Spirit Himself. So that I think prayer for the gospel before the meeting is leading to a better and more intelligent apprehension as to the truth of the glad tidings.

J.S.E. In pursuance of that, would you remark on the expression, "having heard of your faith in Christ Jesus"?

J.T. "Having heard of your faith in Christ Jesus, and the love which ye have towards all the saints", and so forth. Then we have the word heard in regard to Paul himself, "from the day ye heard them and knew indeed the grace of God, in truth: even as ye learned from Epaphras our beloved fellow-bondman, who is a faithful minister of Christ for you, who has also manifested to us your love in the Spirit". That is to say, Epaphras would represent the spirit that we are speaking of, the higher level of things in the gospel, which had laid hold of the Colossians, and Epaphras, who was one of them, informed the apostle. He says, "Who has also manifested to us your love in the Spirit", so that love in the Spirit is evidently the thing that we are led up to in this paragraph. It is something that is to be looked for now, because of the level to which things are being brought in the ministry. Although it may be to fewer numbers, yet the quality is better.

J.G. Would this be supported by verse 28, "whom we announce, admonishing every man, and teaching every man, in all wisdom, to the end that we may present every man perfect in Christ"?

J.T. Well, that is, of course, Paul himself, Paul's ministry itself. But we were trying to work out a little this matter of the gospel as it is preached now amongst us, in our little gatherings. It is to be of a better quality. When we come to verse 28, of course, we come to Paul's ministry, his preaching, what he had in mind, but what we have in mind now is to make the most of things as they are. Even although the numbers may not be large, there should be something there that ministers the truth even to young people, so that their hearts are stirred up by the presentation of something that they can count on in this present disturbed world.

H.P.W. In speaking of the improved quality of the gospel, do you think that there is something particularly attractive on the side of joy, which would counteract the elements that are abroad in the world? I am thinking of "joy in the Holy Spirit".

J.T. That is exactly what I was thinking, and that we come now to the Holy Spirit, "who has also manifested to us your love in the Spirit", what the Colossians had in the Spirit. I have no doubt you are accustomed to what I am saying as to preaching, and the question would arise, Who is to preach, and how often is he preaching, and is he looking after the home front, and all that. Now we find that we have prayers, and the young people and even the young boys in the families are drawn into the prayers, and this fact is not to be overlooked. They are learning to have part in the things of God. Even although the result may not be as great as we might wish, yet the quality is better, and I believe that is of very great importance. The apostle's allusion here to "your love in the Spirit" is to show what Christianity really is. It is not simply that they have received the Spirit, but the love that they have is in the Spirit. We

have to learn to love in the Spirit; not simply to love persons that we may have special predilections for, but to love in the Spirit, which rises to the thought of love as in God Himself.

W.C. Would preaching of that character lead to assembly material being secured?

J.T. Precisely. That is just what I was thinking. You have something that the Lord can use at once, that He can lay His hand on at once. If love is in the Spirit in the gathering, as it was at Colosse, there is something that the Lord can lay His hand upon.

W.C. Is not that indicated in John 4 where the Lord leads on from what you might call the gospel to worship?

J.T. Quite so; and it leads on to a person like the woman who left her waterpot and went her way into the city to testify. This is the sort of things that the Lord can lay His hand on; persons that can testify, and the state of the local assembly as characterised by love in the Spirit.

P.L. So that Onesimus, the convert, is introduced as "a brother beloved". Is that the quality?

J.T. Quite so. "A brother beloved".

Eu.R. Does Acts 26:18, give us the high level of the gospel? "Receive forgiveness of sins, and inheritance among them which are sanctified".

J.T. Very good.

A.R. Does it not seem to start with receiving or knowing, "and knew indeed the grace of God, in truth"? Would that be the start, and would it be included in the gospel that he speaks of, "the word of the truth of the glad tidings"?

J.T. Very good. The word of it, not simply that you preach the gospel, but the word of it, and therefore we have in Timothy, "Preach the word; be instant in season, out of season".

W.S.S. We are not to be "moved away from the hope of the glad tidings". It would be in our hearts in the preaching, would it not?

J.T. Therefore the glad tidings conveys the idea of hope, so that we are not droopy or downcast, we are alive. Caleb says, "Jehovah has kept me alive, as he said, these forty-five years ... and now behold, I am this day eighty-five years old", Joshua 14:10. Therefore if a brother is old, the question is, Is he living in the truth?

P.H.H. What did you mean just now by emphasising the word? "The word of the glad tidings" here, and "Preach the word" in Timothy.

J.T. "The word" conveys the mind of God in the thing. It is not simply the formal thing, the terms of the gospel, but the word of it conveys the mind of God.

Ques. The apostle says, "Even as ye learned from Epaphras". Does the word learned suggest the higher quality of the preaching?

J.T. I was thinking that the young people in the houses of the brethren are brought into the thing in these Lord's day evening prayers. Sometimes you hear young brothers joining in the prayers, and they are learning. One of the most important things, as we have been remarking, is the youth, and how the truth is brought to them. Then the question is raised as to how they are taking it on and being influenced by it. A man like Epaphras would be just the man to help them. He is "one of you", and that would mean that he was one of them characteristically, I would think. He would thus take on things and teach them to the young.

SPIRITUAL FORMATION FOR ASSEMBLY SERVICE (2)

Colossians 1:9 - 29

J.T. I think it will be observed that this epistle is marked by immediate application of the truth to the local company. It therefore differs somewhat from Ephesians, which is marked by the truth itself being unfolded, although, in time, applied to the Ephesians. There is that in Ephesians which corresponds, but it is the value of the truth itself which is stressed there. At other times the need of application is stressed as here in Colossians and in connection with the application we have the thought of prayer. Hence, "For this reason we also, from the day we heard of your faith and love, do not cease praying and asking for you, to the end that ye may be filled with the full knowledge of his will, in all wisdom and spiritual understanding, so as to walk worthily of the Lord unto all well-pleasing, bearing fruit in every good work, and growing by the true knowledge of God, strengthened with all power according to the might of his glory unto all endurance and long suffering with joy". That which is due to the Father, to God, is then added, leading up to the beautiful expression "the kingdom of the Son of his love": an expression which, I think, is only found here, the Son of the Father's love. The instruction therefore leads up to that. Other things are in mind, but generally as applying to the local company at Colosse, only that at the end the apostle is free to speak of himself and his ministry, the aim of which was to "present every man perfect in Christ".

J.Mr. What reason would you say is referred to in verse 9? "For this reason ...".

J.T. What he had been speaking of, I would say. It is a peculiar way of Paul's, that he gathers up what he had been saying and enlarges on it, at the same time centralising it in a certain way, so that here it led to his prayer.

P.L. Do you mean that where Pauline ministry takes root locally the saints, in such a locality, are able to move in the universal stream of what is Pauline and support it?

J.T. Quite so. And then to see, as they evidently did, his peculiar place in the scheme of the truth that shines always in his writings. So that you rightly use the word Pauline. It has its own place and should have its own place in our minds. On any point that may be critical, if Paul bears on it, then he has to be consulted. What he says has to be considered for he indeed has the last word in things. Hence he lays stress on himself; so that if it be a question of discipline, the governing feature must be what Paul says. We must begin with that, and not go to the Old Testament in those cases. Of course, that could only exist after he was called out, because he was called out as "an elect vessel", as the Lord says, "to me". Thus when he is on the scene as formally and definitely appointed in his services, because he has several administrations, then he must be consulted. At the beginning, before Paul, it was the apostles; it says, "they persevered in the teaching and fellowship of the apostles". But when Paul is definitely set up in the service, he has the last word, at least that is how the truth stands in regard of him.

L.E.S. Would his priestly concern here be a link with what is said in 2 Corinthians 11:28? "Besides those things that are without, the crowd of cares pressing on me daily, the burden of all the assemblies".

J.T. In the Corinthian epistles we have an account of his travels and of his work and of his sufferings so as to give weight to what has been remarked and to show that morally he is entitled, under the Lord, to a hearing in all matters.

P.L. Is this seen in the expression, "which is given me towards you to complete the word of God"? Is that the final word?

J.T. Just so.

Ques. Would the truth of the assembly in the gospels be approached by way of Paul too?

J.T. Well, we may look at the truth in a way for our own profit and learning and so on, but when we come to doctrine or to critical matters, we have to consult him. The Lord says he "is an elect vessel to me", as if he had a special place at the Lord's hand for critical matters. John had his place too, but it was as to love and usefulness, extending on indefinitely throughout the dispensation, whereas Paul had the place in critical matters at the beginning, to complete things.

Ques. Is that what is conveyed when he says, "Thus I ordain in all the assemblies"? Is that word authoritative?

J.T. Exactly. You have that throughout the Corinthian epistles. We have to observe whatever he says.

Rem. He says to Timothy, "The things thou hast heard of me in the presence of many witnesses, these entrust to faithful men, such as shall be competent to instruct others also", 2 Timothy 2:2.

J.T. Timotheus knew Paul's way for he had a more personal place with Paul than anyone in the sense of his being Paul's child. No one perhaps could have such a place as he. Although Titus came near it he did not come so near to being a personal aid to Paul as Timotheus did.

A.Al. Does the instruction to Timothy, "Think of what I say, for the Lord will give thee understanding in all things" bear on this?

J.T. Just so. He would instruct him as in that position. Apollos on the other hand had an independent position, which is another matter to be considered. Paul suggested to Apollos to go to Corinth, but he did not take the place of being sent by Paul. "It was not at all his will to go now", Paul says. But Timotheus would go if Paul sent him.

W.W. Why do you think that Paul links Timothy with him here? It says, "For this reason we also". Then in the end of the chapter "whom we announce". In the epistle to the Ephesians it was more personal to himself. He says, "Wherefore I also, having heard of the faith in the Lord Jesus which is in you, and the love which ye have towards all the saints".

J.T. I think here it would be more general, whereas in Ephesians it is Paul's own apostolic authority.

Ques. Would the importance of referring to Paul in critical matters be seen in the account of the shipwreck, where his voice is heard, from time to time, in connection with the exigencies of the voyage?

J.T. Quite so. He said, "Sirs, ye should have hearkened unto me". He was really in charge of the ship, showing how God can bring His servants forward as needed.

W.S.S. Does the expression "to complete the word of God" imply the giving of a fulness to all that had been written before?

J.T. Well, it is not the completion of Scripture, but the completion of the word of God. I suppose the general principle governing the idea of the word of God is that it is really the mind of God.

W.S.S. Apart from Paul's ministry, should we have the fulness of the other scriptures?

J.T. Well, it required Paul's ministry to give the fulness, showing how the Lord takes up certain ones. We might single out Paul and John and Peter, as entering into the whole dispensation. John, I would say, is the one who comes nearest to us, the Lord having him at His hand in view of the changing circumstances of the testimony, and keeping him, as it were, to Himself for needed service. It is in a mysterious sense that he is kept under the Lord's hand; so that whatever may happen, the Lord is ready. It is not simply that the Scriptures are there and the ministry is there, but

someone evidently governed by love that He can lay His hand upon. John was the disciple whom Jesus loved.

Ques. In the Galatian epistle, Paul speaks as though it was a well-recognised fact that he had received from the Lord the apostleship of the nations. Does that enter into this epistle in a special way?

J.T. He says there that "God ... was pleased to reveal his Son in me", which is a striking matter. He does not say, to me but in me.

Rem. It is striking that Peter recognises this very principle, when he singles out Paul, saying, "as our beloved brother Paul also has written".

J.T. Clearly Peter would recognise him as one that had a great place, even a place superior to him in a way. He speaks of him, not simply as a brother, but "our beloved brother Paul". His place in the service is clearly indicated in that expression of Peter's.

W.H. Would his earlier reference in the second epistle to being "established in the present truth" refer to the light brought in by Paul?

J.T. I would think that. "The present truth" is a very good phrase.

Eu.R What would be involved in the thought of God revealing His Son in Paul?

J.T. Well, it is the inwardness of Paul's position, I would think. Peter had a place, of course, in the foundation of the assembly, and also in connection with the material, and the administration of the assembly, but Paul's place is unique. It would seem as if he had the Lord's full confidence. To use the word in an ordinary sense, he had an inlet into the Lord's mind confidentially. There was one that the Lord could trust, and I would say Paul was that one. That comes out in all his personal remarks and they give him so much prominence and so much importance which we must recognise, especially when we come to critical matters.

Rem. "Let him recognise the things that I write to you, that it is the Lord's commandment".

J.T. Yes, It is in the singular, it is the Lord's commandment. The Lord would entrust him with any particular matter. But then what we have already commented upon as to God revealing His Son in Paul, refers to the inwardness of the truth, and its bearing on Paul's position.

Ques. So that his authority is not only based on the exercise of gift, but on what he was substantially in the work of God?

J.T. What the man was personally; and what a man he was! What distinction he acquired and what honour was conferred upon him! He himself tells us that he was "caught up to the third heaven", and then that he was "caught up into paradise". He had a part in paradise.

L.O.L. Does not Paul's knowledge of their faith and love bring out prayer, first on account of the hope, in verse 5, and then that they might be filled with the full knowledge of His will, verse 9?

J.T. Well, just so. It shows the place and importance of prayer in Paul's mind, and I do not know of any time when prayer has been in more prominence than it has been recently. The availability of prayer and the part it has in conditions among the Lord's people are very encouraging. We may rely on it too. Paul is foremost in advocating this thought, and so he says here, "For this reason we also, from the day we heard of your faith and love, do not cease praying and asking for you". It shows the immediate need that was in his mind in connection with the Colossians and that prayer was necessary. It is not simply what he could instruct them in, but his prayer for them.

P.H.H. Would the greatness of his personality in all that he was inwardly make that prayer more powerful? He says similarly in Corinthians, "I myself, Paul, entreat you by the meekness and gentleness of the Christ". Is it the power of his own personality?

J.T. I would think so. We have the idea of a cabinet in David's history; persons over departments, and I would say this must enter into Paul's position. The Lord is operating a system, and Paul is the chief one in it. Peculiar distinction is thus given to him and specially as knowing the inwardness of things, as having the divine mind peculiarly. Then there is the place that prayer has in all this. He had power in prayer, so that things should be brought about. The Lord would do things for him especially.

H.P.W. Would you say a word in connection with this inwardness of Paul's and the expression, "strengthened with all power according to the might of his glory"?

J.T. Well, I think we can get help on that again in David's history for he built inwardly. It says, "David built round about ... and inward", 2 Samuel 5:9. David had a great place, of course, personally and the idea of inwardness was there, but it is especially seen in Paul's case, for God revealed His Son in him. Paul says in 2 Corinthians 12 "that the power of the Christ may dwell upon me". He would gladly suffer and he was suffering very severely too, because evidently he had something wrong with him in his person. One had said that his speech was contemptible. Whether that was true or not we cannot be sure, but there was "a messenger of Satan" for the flesh in him and he asked the Lord three times about it. That would bear out what we are saying and show how accurate he was in his knowledge of Christ. He says, "That I may know him, and the power of his resurrection, and the fellowship of his sufferings". He had those thoughts about the Lord and he would gladly accept the sufferings in order that the power of the Christ might rest upon him in his work. He would suffer rather than lose that, showing how personal his feelings were as to the Lord, and how the Lord trusted him.

L.E.S. So he says, "The Lord stood with me, and gave me power, that through me the proclamation might

be fully made, and all those of the nations should hear", 2 Timothy 4:17.

P.L. The word "Occupy thyself with these things; be wholly in them" bears on what is distinctly Pauline. And further does the school of Tyrannus, where we have the climax of Paul's ministry at Ephesus, suggest that the saints are to be established under Pauline authority in the full scope of the truth by the diligent pursuit of it day by day?

J.T. He makes prominent the reception of the Spirit by the twelve men that were at Ephesus, "Did ye receive the Holy Spirit when ye had believed?", he says. He had in his mind what he would do at Ephesus, not at Colosse, or at Corinth, but at Ephesus. It is a question of the need of the Spirit, not simply ordinary teaching or instruction but the Spirit received. The twelve men did not know, but the apostle instructed them as to it and then he laid his hands on them. They received the Spirit through the laying on of his hands, showing the place he had in the work at Ephesus.

Ques. Did you have something particularly in mind in speaking of "the Son of his love" as the climax of this exercise?

J.T. Well, I think the Son of the Father's love is a reference to Solomon and the place he has in the truth. In view of the young people among us, God would say, "Son, give me thine heart". We are now speaking of Paul, and what there would be of Solomon in his ministry, because we must look for the best if we take up Paul. In taking up anything of God we must look for the best and then work out from that, and Ephesus, of course, is the very best that we have. It is not simply the application of the truth to a company of Christians but the unfolding of the thing itself; the unfolding of what is in the mind of God. Hence, in that epistle, Paul brings out his place, and his knowledge of the mystery. So I believe what is in mind here in the Son of the Father's love is what Paul works out; the

truth in that connection. It says, "who has delivered us from the authority of darkness", a word to be noted, "and translated us into the kingdom of the Son of his love". The word "translated" is to be noted too, for the "us" is not simply the Colossians. It is a question of the saints generally and our translation into "the kingdom of the Son of his love". He has been praying, and now he is really worshipping, in saying, "giving thanks to the Father". It shows how the truth worked out in his soul, and how he would impart that idea to them.

P.H.H. Do you mean by that, that what is suggested in Solomon goes beyond what is in David? Are we to be retained for the realm of peace and glory, and for what is exclusive?

J.T. Well, David was never spoken of in the same way as Solomon. It is said of Solomon that as a babe "Jehovah loved him". I do not know whether that is said of anyone else, save the Lord Jesus, that Jehovah loved him as a babe; not as a man, or a ruler, or a king, but as a babe. Solomon as a babe was loved of Jehovah, and He sent Nathan to name him Jedidiah. David has personal affections in regard to the whole matter, and he would bring Solomon into that, because Jehovah loved him. That is the reason why I mention the fact that He is called here the Son of the Father's love.

P.H.H. Would we have a peculiar link in that kingdom because Solomon sets out sonship by way of adoption as far as we are concerned? Does not God say to David that Solomon should be His son and God would be his Father?

J.T. It is in that sense that the whole matter of sonship comes out in David's history. David said to Nathan, "I dwell in a house of cedars, and the ark of God dwells under curtains", and Nathan says, "Go, do all that is in thy heart; for Jehovah is with thee". But then Nathan spoke too quickly, because Jehovah had in His heart, at that time, to bring in Solomon. It was not to be David, it was to be Solomon. It was sonship

in that sense and it says Jehovah loved Solomon. I believe it is in that sense that he is brought in here. Christ is brought in here as the Son of the Father's love, in view of our translation into that kingdom. It is the place that the Lord Jesus has with the Father as the Son of His love. We read in Romans 6 of the Father raising Christ by His glory. That is another thing to notice, for it would be in keeping with this passage, "the Son of his love".

J.S.E. Why did you emphasise the word translate?

J.T. Well, it is a word to be noted. It says in verse 13, "who has delivered us from the authority of darkness, and translated us into the kingdom of the Son of his love". It is a word to show the totality or fulness of the deliverance of those who form the assembly from the darkness of the devil.

Ques. Does it involve an entirely new place; not substantially but spiritually?

J.T. The word translation involves our being taken out of one state and condition into another, by an act of power. It is a collective thought, I would say.

C.R.B. It says in Proverbs 4:3, "I was a son unto my father". Does that come in here?

J.T. That was in my mind, because I believe "the Son of his love" is a reference to the book of Proverbs. It opens up the book of Proverbs to us, especially to young people. Solomon says, "I was a son unto my father", showing that the youth ought to be attracted by this thought and look into the book of Proverbs and especially in view of the virtuous woman at the end of it. He says in Ecclesiastes 7:28, "a woman ... have I not found", but still he could depict her character here and she represents the assembly. The book of Proverbs thus opens up the truth of the assembly, I would say, for young people especially, and the Son of the Father's love is a most attractive thought in that setting.

Eu.R. Does it involve "sharing the portion of the saints in light"?

J.T. Quite so.

Ques. Is it a little remarkable that some expressions only occur once in Scripture? They seem powerful enough to convey all that there is to be conveyed. We never hear of Jedidiah more than once, and here "the kingdom of the Son of his love" is a unique expression.

J.T. Just so, that is good.

A.R. It says "in whom we have redemption". Would that suggest that we are graced in Christ in this character?

J.T. He works it out in that sense. He is speaking of Christ, of course, but He is the Son of the Father's love. Then "in whom we have redemption, the forgiveness of sins" and so on, showing that it is a peculiar place in which we are graced. We have redemption there.

N.K.M. When it says, "who has made us fit for sharing the portion of the saints in light"; how is that effected by the Father?

J.T. Well, as it is seen here it is a collective thought. It is not a question of how it is effected, but the great thing is that it is effected by the Father; the Father has done it.

W.S.S. Would you say that the great thought in the apostle's mind is what is in the Father's mind for us, namely that we should have a real understanding of these things, not merely an objective knowledge?

J.T. The Father's action is in mind. "The Son of his love" is a beautiful expression, and, as I was saying, points to Solomon. In that sense it points to the glory of Christ in His Solomonic character, and not simply in His Davidic character. It suggests the very best and most precious in the sense of persons.

Ques. Would the expression "his only-begotten Son" emphasise the tenderness of the Father's love?

J.T. Quite so. "He that spared not his own Son, but delivered him up for us all", is another one like that. These expressions bring into view the relations in which divine Persons stand to each other. The

Spirit of God through Paul thus brings it in here, no doubt to suggest the place Christ has in Paul's heart. He was the Son of the Father's love, but God had revealed his Son in Paul. Paul says, "God ... was pleased to reveal his Son in me", Galatians 1:16. He revealed that Son, that blessed Person, in Paul's heart, I would say, and that brings out just what we have been saying as to Paul and the place he has in the divine system of things. He has a unique place in the divine economy. No one has it but he. Hence his being taken up into heaven, and hearing wonderful things; things, he says, "which it is not allowed to man to utter". So perhaps we must begin to think about Paul in a different way and revert back to the Lord's remark as to him that he "is an elect vessel to me".

F.C.H. Does not that fit in with Micah 5:2 - 4, in regard of Christ Himself? "Out of thee shall he come forth unto me who is to be Ruler in Israel". Then it goes on to say, "And he shall stand and feed his flock in the strength of Jehovah, in the majesty of the name of Jehovah his God". The tenderness and authority that marked Paul's ministry would be conveyed in that, would it not?

J.T. It is a question of what is knowable amongst the brethren. We have hardly touched it really. I do not say, what is known, but what is knowable. Paul says, "my knowledge", and no one had such knowledge as he.

L.O.L. Would you say that the service of God never reached such a height as in Solomon's time as we see in 2 Chronicles 5?

J.T. I would say that is true. The description we have in 1 Kings especially is to bring that out and to show how beautifully things were done. The glory of Christ was foreshadowed in the service of Solomon.

R.B. Would the expression, "the kingdom of the Son of his love" convey the thought of display in contrast to what is inward?

J.T. Very likely, because the Father would take account of Christ in that way and that He should be displayed as the Son of His love. I believe it may be taken to run with the first day of the week, because on the first day of the week the Father raised Him by His glory. He was raised by the glory of the Father and we are entitled to regard that as giving character to the first day of the week.

A.Al. Would the expression "the assembly of God, which he has purchased with the blood of his own", bear on this matter?

J.T. It clearly points to the affections that the Father had for the Son. He was His Own.

A.D.T. Is there a link with John's ministry? It says, "The Father loves the Son, and has given all things to be in his hand".

J.T. Very good. That comes out in John 3, and then chapter 4 is to make known the Lord in His service. The woman of Samaria especially comes into evidence and then the worship of the Father also. We can see how everything has been placed in the hands of "the Son of his love".

Ques. In view of current exercises, should the expression "saints in light" be noted? If we are in the consciousness of that there would be no difficulty as to points of detail and our all doing the same thing.

J.T. The Father has "made us fit for sharing the portion of the saints in light". It is not simply the portion that we have, but where it is. It is in light. All this fits in with Colossians and the immediate link with Paul too.

Now we want to come to the second great point here and that is the question of the Lord's own Person. It is worked out, without a paragraph, from verse 14, where it says, "in whom we have redemption", (that is, in the Son of His love) "the forgiveness of sins; who is image of the invisible God, firstborn of all creation; because by him were created all things, the things in the heavens

and the things upon the earth, the visible and the invisible, whether thrones, or lordships, or principalities, or authorities: all things have been created by him and for him. And he is before all, and all things subsist together by him. And he is the head of the body, the assembly; who is the beginning, firstborn from among the dead, that he might have the first place in all things for in him all the fulness of the Godhead was pleased to dwell". So that we have before us now this great subject of the Person of Christ in regard to the creation, in regard to all things, and, finally, in regard to the assembly, that He is Head of it.

A.St. Why is there such a wonderful description of His Person here?

J.T. I think it is essential that the Lord should be seen personally according to these verses in view of the truth that was intended to be unfolded, and it is a question of His Person. The time has come for the truth of the Lord's Person to be brought in and so the apostle pursues it, saying, "who is image of the invisible God, firstborn of all creation; because by him were created all things, the things in the heavens and the things upon the earth" and so forth. It is a question of His glory in creation, and then His glory in the assembly, as Head of it.

W.S.S. Would it be a distinctive glory which no creature could share?

J.T. Quite so. He is viewed as the Creator; all things being created by Him.

A.H.G. In the expression "he is the head of the body", the He is emphasised. Is that a reference back to the glories described in the previous verses?

J.T. It is an additional thought. The apostle moves on from the thought of redemption to the thought that He is the "image of the invisible God", that is to say, it is Deity in Christ. Then He is the "firstborn of all creation", meaning that He has the chief place in creation, which is amplified when he says, "because by

him were created all things, the things in the heavens and the things upon the earth, the visible and the invisible, whether thrones, or lordships, or principalities, or authorities: all things have been created by him and for him". All that is to bring out His Deity, His part in the Deity. Then we have His distinctive place as Man in it, and finally His part as Head of the body, the assembly.

Ques. Is there a link between the expression in Proverbs 8:30, "the nursling of his love" and what is said in Colossians in relation to Christ as the Son of His love?

J.T. In Proverbs it might be translated the architect. Things were created on the principle of skill or architecture. The 'nursling' is a very tender thought, but it is wisdom appropriating the term to itself, and, of course, we may go too far as to that and make too much of wisdom. It is said in 1 Corinthians 1:24 that Christ is the wisdom of God, but in Proverbs 8 wisdom is not a person, but a quality; it is personified, in a certain sense, but it is simply a quality attached to God as apprehended in creation.

Eu.R. Here is it the greatness of this Person; that He is the source, the means and the end in creation?

J.T. Just so.

Ques. Does "image" here go further than representation? Does it involve the whole revelation of God?

J.T. Image is representation. It is stated that Christ "is the image of the invisible God". John says, "No one has seen God at any time"; but then he qualifies that in saying, "the only-begotten Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him". It is a question of declaration, not revelation.

J.Mr. When the Lord Jesus was born, He who is "Firstborn of all creation", there was no room for them in the inn.

J.T. Well, it is a question of the smallness of the inn and that a place had to be found for Him elsewhere.

Of course, we can quite understand that there is no place great enough to house Him, but still He is pleased to dwell in the assembly.

Ques. Would Hebrews 1 bear on what you are saying, "the effulgence of his glory and the expression of his substance"? Is that any different or would it amplify what you have in mind?

J.T. These expressions in the first chapter of Hebrews have to be carefully used. We have the fact that "God having spoken in many parts and in many ways formerly to the fathers in the prophets, at the end of these days has spoken to us in the person of the Son". The article is not there properly, so that it really reads: 'God has spoken to us in Son'. It is really the Son who is the Creator and He is the Speaker. So it says, "whom he has established heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds; who being the effulgence of his glory and the expression of his substance". Now the notes help in that, and I think ought to be taken account of. The note to the word "effulgence" in verse 3, reads 'that which fully presents the glory which is in something else. Thus light makes us know what the sun is; the tabernacle, what the pattern in the mount was'. Then again, another note to the word "substance" in verse 3, reads, 'Clearly'substance','essential being',not'person.'' Therefore what we have to regard in these words is that Christ is the effulgence of the glory of God, and the expression of His substance. It is to be noticed that the word 'substance' (according to the note) is not 'person'. It is therefore outside of us and we have to say we do not understand. We cannot say anything about the essential being of God for He is spoken of as "dwelling in unapproachable light; whom no man has seen, nor is able to see", 1 Timothy 6:16.

G.H.M. Does not Hebrews 1 connect with "all the fulness" which was pleased to dwell in Him? (Colossians 1:19). Is the fulness in Him something separate from what He is personally?

J.T. The word fulness is a noun, just like the word greatness. You cannot just say what it is; you just have to accept what it may mean. The word greatness is used in that way also, and it is better just to let it stand as it is, that in Christ "all the fulness was pleased to dwell". What do we know about that? We have just to bow our heads and say we do not understand, but it is there.

F.C.H. Is the force of it that it is "the Son of his love" who is all this?

J.T. Exactly. That makes it all very simple. He is a lovable Person, yet, at the same time, He is beyond us as to any thought of expression physically, for it is a question of God here, and that in Christ is the fulness of God. The word fulness there, as we have remarked, is a noun.

Ques. Is that borne out by His word "no one knows the Son but the Father"?

J.T. Quite so. And "No one has seen God at any time" is another expression of the same character.

P. L. Is not this sense of infinitude to us essential in view of the promotion of the service of God?

J.T. Quite so. We cannot speak of divine Persons as if we knew Them as we know each other. They are beyond us. Even the Lord Jesus, as Man, is beyond us.

P.L. 'There only to adore'.

J.T. Quite so. Hence we worship the Son, we worship the Lord, as well as the Father.

A.N.W. Is there any scripture that speaks more highly of Christ than Colossians 1?

J. T. I hardly think there is. These verses are specially devoted to the thought of the Person of Christ. It seems as if, in the apostle's mind, it was necessary to bring them in, in view of the present time. We are dealing now with practical things, and in view of the present time the brethren should have clearly before them that the personal Deity of Christ enters into all these things that we have been going through in this chapter. He is God, and our hearts are bowed before

Him in the midst of all the confusion there is, and He is the One that God has appointed to judge the world in righteousness. God has appointed Him, so that the matter resolves itself into this that we know where we are, that things are vested in Christ, and He is God Himself.

P.L. Is this the ark and the two thousand cubits between it and the people?

J.T. That is just what it is. We are not to be too free in talking about the things of God and the Persons of the Deity, but we must speak of them in a holy and reverential way. I believe Colossians 1 is intended to teach us that and it is needed, too, in view of the condition of the Colossians, where they were in danger of philosophy and vain deceit.

W.S.S. Would you say a word about the two references to "firstborn"? In verse 15 it says, "firstborn of all creation", and then in verse 18, "firstborn from among the dead".

J.T. They show how the Spirit of God brings in the things that adorn the Scriptures, and give them a fulness. He is firstborn of creation and then firstborn in relation to coming out of death. "He is the head of the body, the assembly"; and then it adds, "who is the beginning, firstborn from among the dead, that he might have the first place in all things". So that we are to accustom ourselves to giving Him the first place.

W.S.S. I was thinking that "firstborn of all creation" does not bring in the thought of relationship, whereas "firstborn from among the dead" does.

J.T. Quite so; only He has the first place in that. "Christ the firstfruits; afterward they that are Christ's at his coming", 1 Corinthians 15:23.

In verse 24 the apostle begins another paragraph, saying, "Now, I rejoice in sufferings for you, and I fill up that which is behind of the tribulations of Christ in my flesh, for his body, which is the assembly; of which I became minister, according to the dispensation

of God which is given me towards you to complete the word of God, the mystery which has been hidden from ages and from generations, but has now been made manifest to his saints; to whom God would make known what are the riches of the glory of this mystery among the nations, which is Christ in you the hope of glory". The apostle now is releasing himself from all others to think of his ministry and the place that he has. It gives a peculiar finish to the chapter and makes way for what is said more specifically in chapters 2 and 3. His service had the finishing thought in it, "that we may present every man perfect in Christ".

W.W. Going back to verses 19 and 20, it says there, "for in him all the fulness of the Godhead was pleased to dwell, and by him to reconcile all things to itself". I would like to know the difference between the thought of in Him and by Him.

J.T. I think it all has in mind, first to establish the Deity of the Lord, so that He might have His own proper place in our minds and hearts, and then to show, that not only we, but all things will be reconciled by that Person. It is a question of the Deity, and of God doing it, and that He has this Person in His hands, as we have been saying. Paul was in Christ's hands in this same sense, but God has this Person in His hands for these things; first for the thought of the fulness of the Godhead and then to reconcile all things to Himself. God has this Person and is employing Him (we are speaking reverently) to reconcile all things to Himself; "all things" I suppose being the universe. Everything is to be reconciled; that is, brought into complacency with God. Thus he runs on, in verse 24, as we have been saying, to his own special service in the completion of all this, and that would be to "present every man perfect in Christ". It is not every thing, but every man; because that is the immediate matter in Colossians. It is a question of man, and every one is to be presented perfect.

Ques. Would you say a word as to the scope of that expression, "present every man perfect in Christ"? Does it involve Paul's ministry of the gospel and of the assembly?

J.T. Well, of course, it cannot be the assembly fully because it is every man, but then we must have the thought of perfection in each of us. God selects us, and He thinks of each of us personally, and then our being presented in perfection to Him. It is a question of the completion of the work of God and the detail involved in that regarding each of us. We have been speaking of the Lord taking us through death and the hope that there is even in that, but now we have the thought that we will come out in perfection. The divine thought in every one of us will come out in due course, and Paul was labouring to that end when he says here, "that we may present every man perfect in Christ".

A.N.W. Is his combating primarily his prayers, more than his work and ministry?

J.T. Showing that there was combat in it, for Satan had to do with it. He was working in the midst of conditions such as there are in this world, where Satan has power. Hence the need of combat, which has a great place in this epistle. It is a solemn thing that we have to do with Satan.

A.H.G. Why does he bring it down to the thought of every man here after having spoken of the assembly?

J.T. To show, I suppose, the individual character of the work of God in each person and what God must have. He first had Adam, one man, and then a woman, but now it is every man. Think of the innumerableness of those that are to be presented perfect, and what pleasure God has in that! Paul was labouring to the end that that should come about and it was a question of combat, because the devil would have his part in it too.

E.G. Would you connect "every man perfect in Christ" with Ephesians, "chosen ... in him before the foundation of the world"? If we were chosen in Him,

God is going to have us brought up to a state of perfection.

J.T. Well; it is a question of the work that is involved in the gospel and the ministry that God is carrying on. We should see what pains have to be taken so that we should not work in any loose way in dealing with the things of God. God is not doing things thus. He is working through His own skilled workman, and that skilled workman was Paul. It is a question of learning how to do things so as to finish them, and Paul is a model for us all. What is being done is to be finished. I believe that is what this chapter means. He singles himself out here to show how he was engaged in finishing matters. If a man comes before him, and he cites many, then he is going to finish that man.

Ques. Is that why admonishing and teaching are mentioned in this chapter?

J.T. Quite so. It is a question of what is involved in the ministry, whoever may be employed in it.

P.H.H. Would Joseph labouring with his brethren give the idea of the work?

J.T. Yes, see the pains he took with them, putting Simeon into prison, and all that he did with others, so as to come to the time when he could speak directly to his brethren and love them.

P.L. Do you see this in Hiram? It says that he was "a worker in brass; and he was full of wisdom and understanding and knowledge, to do all kinds of works in brass. And he came to king Solomon, and made all his work", 1 Kings 7:14. Would that be "the Son of his love" and would "all his work" be the completion?

J.T. Very good. So that we have eleven hundred brethren here today, and what is the intent of it? Surely it is not to have a holiday or anything like that, but what is in mind is that we should become instructed in the work of God and in the service of God. Paul was labouring on those lines, to "present every man perfect in Christ". He had no lower standard than that.

W.C. Would Ezekiel 37 fit into it, bone coming to bone and finally all standing on their feet?

J.T. Quite so. It says, "these bones are the whole house of Israel".

J.P.H. Would you distinguish between the "full-grown man" in Ephesians 4:13, and "every man perfect in Christ" here in Colossians?

J.T. Certainly, it is each individual in Colossians, whereas the "full-grown man" in Ephesians is one thought. It is just like "the new man" which is one thought.

Eu.R. Joseph selected five men of his brethren and presented them to Pharaoh. Does that link on?

J.T. Yes, quite so. There were eleven but he selected five to present them to Pharaoh. It was a question of what he would present. So here it is to "present every man perfect in Christ".

Ques. Would the minister have before him not only what God has in the aggregate in the assembly but what He has in the personnel?

J.T. Exactly. What a glorious thought that is! What God has in the work of His hands! We may well say, "What hath God wrought!", for it is not only what He has in the assembly, but what He has in each person who forms the assembly. Each person is an entity, has a being, and has a history, and God has had to do with it. The full result is that that being is presented perfect in Christ.

P.L. "The men whom thou gavest me"?

J.T. It is the word men, not the persons, but the men. It is the idea of full growth.

Ques. Does what the apostle says as to himself in Philippians 3:12 bear on this? "Not that I ... am already perfected; but I pursue".

J.T. Just so. He says that he was not already perfected but that he pursued, and the point was "the calling on high of God in Christ Jesus".

H.P.W. Does it give great lustre to the Holy Spirit's work, and would not "the might of his glory" come in there?

J.T. Yes. Then the skill, too, of each of us, because God is looking for skilled men, not only apprentices. Apprenticeship in the levitical service is not the same as the full-grown man. A skilled man is thirty years of age. It means that he is skilled in the work of God.

Rem. So that while Paul takes the lead here, Epaphras seems to be in reserve, the matter being so important.

J.T. Just so. He and others are mentioned. We shall come to that later, God willing, but what we are speaking of now, this matter of skill, is of prime importance and yet very practical. We are not just doing things as well as we know how, but we have in mind to present things perfectly. Things are to be done well and rightly, as it is said of the Lord Jesus, "He hath done all things well", Mark 7:37.

A.Al. Is this seen in Mark's gospel where the Lord chose twelve that they might be with Him?

J.T. Very good. It is suitable for Mark too, because it is a question of workmen in Mark. So it says, "he appointed twelve that they might be with him, and that he might send them to preach". He was concerned that they might be His. It is like David in the cave. Although there were a good many there, they were a motley lot, but he made them into a great army, the greatest warriors that ever had appeared up till then.

Rem. "These are the ... mighty men whom David had", 2 Samuel 23:8.

J.T. Exactly. The mighty men whom David had.

P. L. Is this great skill seen also in Aholiab and Bezaleel, as bound up with the complacent divine dwelling in love? Hence Colossians, as leading up to this great climax, insists on skill?

J. T. Quite so. This is a book of first-rate importance, and I believe God has approved of our taking it up.

Ques. Do Priscilla and Aquila come into this, where Paul says, "my fellow-workmen in Christ Jesus", Romans 16:3? Would that show that a sister can have part in it?

J.T. Well, exactly. They are always spoken of on equal terms. Aquila and Priscilla are each spoken of the same number of times, showing that a man and his wife may be actively engaged together in the service of God.

SPIRITUAL FORMATION FOR ASSEMBLY SERVICE (3)

Colossians 2:1 - 23

J.T. The idea of combat in this chapter affords opportunity to speak of what occasions it. Satan invaded the garden of Eden and then Israel, for he specially attacked Israel in Jerusalem, and now he attacks the assembly. A wide sphere of enquiry therefore enters into this reading, as to the occasion of conflict, or combat. The word really involves physical war, but the spiritual thought is in mind, although it is not enlarged on as in Ephesians. We are told there that "our struggle is not against blood and flesh, but against principalities ... against spiritual power of wickedness in the heavenlies". There is the suggestion of what is called "the expanse" in creation, as it was after the chaotic condition had arisen. To make it practical, we have to consider why Satan should find occasion to invade the assembly, for it is said that the gates of Hades shall not prevail against it (see Matthew 16:18), and that is a comforting thought. At the same time the idea of the expanse, which God called Heavens in the first of Genesis, reminds us that Satan personally has made the attack and has found some success. It thus becomes a question of where the attack is made and why. In a general way the Creator resented the interference, and that is shown in the negative wording of the account of the second day. There is nothing said about its being good, although the general fact remains, according to the last verse of Genesis 1, that what was done was very good. But there is a reserve. The chapter now before us opens up much to instruct us as to the attack which is being made, and which occasions combat. The allusion would be to an arena, and that there is a danger of damage, because this chapter says, "I would have you know what combat I have for you". We may thus locate the position, for it

was in view of the protection of the gentiles, but particularly, as the apostle goes on to say, "as many as have not seen my face in flesh; to the end that their hearts may be encouraged, being united together in love, and unto all riches of the full assurance of understanding, to the full knowledge of the mystery of God; in which are hid all the treasures of wisdom and of knowledge". There is a suggestion of the need of hiding in view of a possible attack of an adversary, as the Lord Himself, in the gospel, says, "An enemy hath done this", Matthew 13:28. We have thus just to locate who the enemy is and where the attack is or has been made. Then it is a question of who is meeting it, or how it is to be met, because of the treasures in the mystery. It is to be kept in mind that the mystery involves that things are to be hidden and not displayed in any natural sort of way; indeed, the natural mind is not to be brought into it. Wherever the natural mind is active, we may be sure there will be an attack.

H.W.A. Do you think Hezekiah had some sense of that when he saw that the enemy was minded to get to Jerusalem; he saw that Jerusalem was the objective?

J.T. Yes. Later, however, he neglected protection, comforting himself that there would be peace in his day, and he showed the princes of Babylon all his house, and that is just the point in question now.

A.M. Would the references to Laodicea in this epistle indicate the measure of success that the enemy had?

J.T. If we compare our remarks with the Lord's words in dealing with the different assemblies, we might say that Satan had an opportunity in Laodicea; but, of course, the great opportunity was in Thyatira. Therefore, it is a question of whether we should now introduce the Lord's words in His addresses which come down the line historically to the Romish system. Our chapter hardly leads to that, nor do I think that Laodicea in itself would suggest it. The seven assemblies were

in the Lord's mind and He was in the midst of them according to Revelation. He was there, however, in altered garb and with His affections shut up. That is how He is presented in the assemblies, according to the first chapter of Revelation. So John says, "I turned back to see the voice", which is a striking thing, because it is a question of hearing really, although he turned back to see. It was a question of what was to be seen, and so it says, "I saw seven golden lamps, and in the midst of the seven lamps one like the Son of man, clothed with a garment reaching to the feet, and girt about at the breasts with a golden girdle: his head and hair white like white wool, as snow; and his eyes as a flame of fire; and his feet like fine brass, as burning in a furnace; and his voice as the voice of many waters". That is to say the Lord is dealing in Revelation with a later period historically in the testimony and Laodicea is in mind with the other assemblies. There were seven and Laodicea is the last of them. It is not in mind as attacked, or in itself an object of attack, it has still the status of an assembly. We thus have to question where the attack began and that raises the whole question as to how Satan gets in and how he is to be viewed. The cause of the combat requires searching because it was primarily through Eve, the feminine side, and we might say, therefore, that the assembly herself, typically, occasioned the opportunity.

P.L. Would "persuasive speech", verse 4, link on with Satan's approach to Eve?

J.T. Yes. No doubt the allusion is to the Greek ability to speak, because speech is characteristically a feature of Greek. It suggests that part of humanity which is skilled in the sense of speech or language, and this itself ought to be in our minds. We are apt to make much of anything we have of that kind, whereas it affords an opportunity for the devil. No doubt the Greek ability to speak was in the apostle's mind when he says, "That no one may delude you by persuasive speech". Paul's speech was said to be contemptible. It was something

that the devil would attack reproachfully or derisively, and that is a thing to be avoided. If brethren are defective in their speech, or in their language, it is not a matter that should concern us very much. It is the delusive character, I think, of Greek oratory and its place in the history of humanity, that Paul speaks of as persuasive.

H.F.N. Would you help us in regard to the distinctive features of the mystery as presented in Colossians? First that "in which are hid all the treasures of wisdom and of knowledge" and then the thought of the mystery as "Christ in you the hope of glory". Would the truth of the mystery be the great bulwark and preservative against all these satanic attacks?

J.T. Well, that is going too far, I would think, because we are dealing here with the negative side, and that which occasions the attack. It is a question of speech and what the enemy has found in delusive speech. It is not simply what is hidden; indeed, I would think the hiding was necessitated by the attack. The mystery is a matter that God has had in reserve so as to hide things. For instance, parabolical ministry is to hide the truth from certain conditions, that is, from those who would make much of speech and language.

Ques. It is said of the apostles that they were unlettered men. Is that the character of person that the Lord Jesus would use?

J.T. Well, that is the reason why I referred to it. Our brother was bringing in the question of the mystery which, of course, is a prime matter here, but I would say the question of speech is the point of attack. Therefore, as has been alluded to, the apostles were not lettered men. They were not men characterised by learning, whereas the schools and colleges are all based on learning.

P.H.H. Is that why presently, it says, "lead you away as a prey through philosophy and vain deceit, according to the teaching of men"? Does the speech tend to become teaching to lead man away?

J.T. Well, it tends to make teaching attractive. Hence people speak of oratory. They say, What oratory; What ability in speaking! Whereas, in truth, Paul is not characterised by that; he does not speak like that. If we are to take his opponents, they said that his speech was contemptible, but nevertheless, God used it for conversions. He used it to build up His people.

G.C.S. They brought in the orator to attack Paul as to the resurrection.

W.H. Moses, himself, was one who was skilled in words and deeds of the Egyptians, but he had to learn to speak in a different way, had he not?

J.T. Quite so. He said to Jehovah he could not speak. That is something we all have to come to in regard of divine things, for we must not build ourselves up on any ability in regard of speech. Not indeed that speech is not to be employed, because God is the author of speech and the power of speech, as He said to Moses, "Who hath made man's mouth?". God made it. But then the question is whether that is meant in this reference to delusive speech. It is not simply a question of the faculty of speech in man, but the use of skilled oratory to build up the world.

W.C. It is said to Thyatira as to Jezebel that, "she who calls herself prophetess, and she teaches and leads astray my servants to commit fornication and eat of idol sacrifices".

J.T. Well, just so. That system makes much of it. They leave nothing undone that is needed to build it up, and if speech is needed, they will make much of speech. Hence, in their system, learning is a great matter with them.

Ques. When Paul speaks of his own entrance to the Corinthians, does he give speech according to God? "And I, when I came to you, brethren, came not in excellency of word, or wisdom, announcing to you the testimony of God". Is that his own estimate of how he was among them?

J.T. Quite so.

Rem. He also says in Corinthians, that five words with the understanding is better than many in an unknown tongue.

J.T. Well, of course, an unknown tongue is another thing to be avoided. There are those who pretend to that, whereas simplicity is the thought and the ability that God gives.

Ques. Does the serpent being more crafty than any other animal link on with the delusive speech?

J.T. I would think so. It would be what he employed, and the wording of what he said to the woman is given.

Ques. Does the first attack of the enemy in Acts 5 bear on this? It says of Ananias and Sapphira that they lied to the Holy Spirit. Would not that be the climax in a way of the "persuasive speech"?

J.T. Well, it is a question of whether lying is specially persuasive. Of course, it might be. Public speakers, however, in supporting some particular cause, use oratory, and skilful expressions; they say one thing, yet hide others by their words. They have to have recourse to this sort of thing, but such a course is to be refused among the Lord's people. Simplicity is the thought; so that, although Paul was a simple person, he knew the truth.

Ques. Is the origin of "persuasive speech" found in Satan in Eden?

J.T. That is just what has been remarked and that the actual wording is given. It should be noticed that he is never called Satan at the outset. Although it is what is attributed to him later, and Satan is known later, he has not such a name at the outset. It is Satan as among the Greeks and I would say, particularly among the Jews. The ability of speaking so as to deceive is in mind and what the Greek language is capable of. It brings in mere learning in religious things. Mary called the Lord "Rabboni", and it is said that it was Hebrew,

though possibly it is not pure Hebrew but the current dialect. That is to say, she would be simple. The simple vernacular, I think, is the thing. The simple way in which the truth is learned and to be ministered is the point, for we are not assuming to be anything. If we are dependent in our words, God will give us the mouth and wisdom that is needed so that we find means of expressing the thing that we have in our hearts.

E.C.M. Moses says, "I am not eloquent ... for I am slow of speech", but Jehovah says, "I will be with thy mouth, and will teach thee what thou shalt say".

J.T. Very good. The expression "with thy mouth" is very beautiful. How God can be with us, the most ordinary of people. It is a question of those whom He takes up, and dependence on Himself in them. It is a question of what God can do for us, for He can do wonders through anyone on the ground of their being dependent.

Rem. "It shall be given to you in that hour", Matthew 10:19.

J.T. Just so, "in that hour".

Rem. At the third temptation, the Lord calls him Satan. He does not call him Satan before. I was thinking of what you said as to the name that is given to him when he discloses himself.

J.T. Just so. He is called "the tempter", which is a characteristic and right word.

Now there is much more in the chapter than this negative thought, although, of course, the question of speech that may be used in the ministry is important, because that is what concerns us. Then the passage says, "For I would have you know what combat I have for you, and those in Laodicea, and as many as have not seen my face in flesh"; showing that he was at that disadvantage, as not having seen them in the flesh, "to the end that their hearts may be encouraged, being united together in love, and unto all riches of the full assurance of understanding, to the full knowledge of the

mystery of God; in which are hid all the treasures of wisdom and of knowledge". We have to consider now these treasures, how they are hidden, and how we are to hold them; because when we speak of the assembly we must be practical and regard ourselves as of it. It is a question of whether we are using any methods or ways in our preaching or teaching that the enemy could use; methods that would not hide the mysteries of God which are spoken of here. It says, "in which are hid all the treasures of wisdom and of knowledge". That is to say, we are to be the custodians of the treasures, I mean the assembly is, because it is the assembly that is alluded to in the word mystery.

P.H.H. Would the thought of stewardship come in here? Paul says, "servants of Christ, and stewards of the mysteries of God", and then, "it is sought in stewards, that a man be found faithful", 1 Corinthians 4:1, 2. Would faithfulness there include the thought of knowing how to hide and not bring out a thing in a way to be attacked?

J.T. Yes. It bears, of course, on those who form the assembly, because the assembly has no existence without us. It is a question of persons, and we, that is, Christians, are the persons. It therefore becomes especially a question of ourselves and those who minister, whether they minister in the gospel or minister the truth of the assembly, or the truth generally. It if a question of how we do it and whether we are in any danger of using delusive speech or anything that would make the truth popular. The Lord, in introducing the great thought of the assembly in Matthew 16, makes a special reference to what was said. "Then he enjoined on his disciples that they should say to no man that he was the Christ". That is, He enjoined a hiding principle and it was for the disciples to pay attention to that.

J.M. Would what Paul says in 2 Corinthians 1:12 bear on this matter of speaking? "For our boasting is this, the testimony of our conscience, that in simplicity and sincerity before God, (not in fleshly wisdom but in

God's grace,) we have had our conversation in the world, and more abundantly towards you". And then in the end of chapter 2, "For we do not, as the many, make a trade of the word of God; but as of sincerity, but as of God, before God, we speak in Christ".

J.T. Very good. That was in one's mind indeed, because Paul enlarges there on this very point. Of course, it bears on all of us because, after all, he is the model for us under Christ. The Lord has taken him on to use him in that sense, as representative of Himself, as he says, "Be ye followers of me, even as I also am of Christ", 1 Corinthians 11:1.

E.E.P. Would you say that Paul came under the influence of this proper speech when Ananias addressed him as "Saul, brother"?

J.T. The point is that he was a brother.

H.F.N. Would Paul's culminating speech be in Ephesians 5, "I speak as to Christ, and as to the assembly"?

J.T. Well, it was to bring authority in. What was in his mind was Christ and the assembly, because Adam and Eve had been alluded to, and they really spoke of Christ and the assembly. This shows how typical speech may be used, but the point is to make it clear that it is typical for the real thing is in what is spiritual. The antitype must be in spiritual language.

W.C. Would Delilah's persistency with Samson, vexing him so that he should tell her that in which his strength lay, remind us of the peril of the system and the feminine side of deception?

J.T. Just so, Satan using the feminine to deceive.

Eu.R. Would you say a word as to the contrast between "the full knowledge of the mystery" in verse 2 and then "in which are hid all the treasures of wisdom and of knowledge", in verse 3. We get "full knowledge" and "knowledge". What is implied in full knowledge?

J.T. Well, the word involves completeness. So that we have, in Ephesians 4:11, an allusion to ministry,

where it says, "he has given some apostles, and some prophets, and some evangelists, and some shepherds and teachers, for the perfecting of the saints; with a view to the work of the ministry, with a view to the edifying of the body of Christ; until we all arrive at the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, at the full-grown man". The word 'full knowledge' here in verse 2 of our chapter would, of course, have that in mind; "unto all riches of the full assurance of understanding, to the full knowledge of the mystery of God". The apostle was about to say that all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge were hidden in it and it was important that not only should they have that knowledge but have it in a full way. That, of course, is a great point now with us, for we are to be accurate and have things in their fulness and completeness, as the Scripture teaches them. We are not to be bringing out things that are not in Scripture, for we can only meet any evil or error by the truth.

A.H.G. You have spoken of the Father's activities, but here it is "the mystery of God". What would be involved in that expression?

J.T. It is called "the mystery of Christ" elsewhere. It is to bring out the full thought, I would think, particularly in view of what we have been saying as to the object of the attack, the means of it and where the thing happens. God, I believe, is the fullest thought to be applied. If we are dealing with the mystery it is a question of God, for we are led back to the beginning of things. The Colossians were in need of all these things, because they were exposed to vain deceit. That is to say, the allusion would doubtless first be to Greek philosophy, and then as we go on in the chapter, to religious features. These two became the means of the attack, so that it would be Greek philosophy and Judaism that the chapter aims at.

E. J. "Through wisdom is a house built, and by understanding it is established; and by knowledge are

the chambers filled with all precious and pleasant substance", Proverbs 24:4.

J.T. That is a very good reference as to how a house is built.

Ques. Would you think that what Paul says, "that their hearts may be encouraged, being united together in love", is a necessary condition before these things are entered upon?

J.T. Well, I think so. You have in mind that love is the point?

Ques. And "being united together" in it. I wondered whether we needed the brethren to enter upon these things?

J.T. Just so. I think the Lord is helping the brethren in these matters. I have been greatly struck by the way that sympathy for one another among the brethren is called forth in all parts of the earth. It is a notable evidence, I believe, of the work of God and I believe sympathy should, and normally does, precede active love. Sufferings and the like are in mind and they draw out the sympathies of the saints, and then love becomes in evidence, and the building up in love, for love always edifies.

P.H.H. Are there certain limitations mentioned here in the word 'not'? For instance, "according to the elements of the world, and not according to Christ", (verse 8). And then later, "not holding fast the head"; (verse 19). Then in the next chapter, "not on the things that are on the earth"; (verse 2). Are our minds helped into positive things by the limitations of the word 'not'?

J.T. Quite so. I have often thought of that as agreeing with the division of the land of Canaan, because Colossians is working up to the idea of the division of the land, though they were coming short of it. The word 'not' would mean the shutting out of the world, so that our boundaries are limited to ourselves. It is a question of the brethren and their being united together in love.

P.H.H. In relation to that, would you say something about the fulness of the Godhead dwelling in Christ? I do not know if I follow your thought, but I was wondering whether the positiveness and fulness of what is in Christ bodily and our holding the Head are the great preservatives against the attacks.

J.T. Well, going back to the idea of boundaries, and limitations, and companionships and associations, the idea of not (not on things below) is of great importance. Even in regard to the distance between a man's house or himself and the meeting which he should attend. These boundaries in themselves are not hallowed; it is only a question of what relates to the brethren, to ourselves, that things become hallowed, and so here "you" -- "your hearts"; that is, yourselves "being united together in love". Thus the sphere that belongs to us and in which we are to operate and to live is the circle of the brethren. Perhaps you will enlarge on what you had in mind as to headship, linking it on with what I have attempted to say as to ourselves, and our being united together in love.

P.H.H. I was thinking of the word fulness; the "fulness of the Godhead" being mentioned as in Him bodily, and then "ye are complete [or filled full] in him". Would that mean, that in regard to limitations which the refusing of persuasive speech, delusion and so on would impose we have full supply in Christ of what is needed and we need go outside of Him for nothing?

J.T. Well, I think what should precede that in our minds is this question of ourselves. We are together; that is, ourselves and then the Lord Himself having come into bodily form is in relation to us, to ourselves. In chapter 1, you have the fulness in verse 19: "in him all the fulness was pleased to dwell" without mentioning bodily. In chapter 2 persons are in mind, and Christ is spoken of in a personal way as in bodily form. It carries with it the idea of substantiality, I would say, what is substantial. We have in each one of us what is substantial

or else there is nothing. If it is merely a question of what we know, that is not anything; it is a question of what we are personally, what each one is personally. The assembly is made up of persons, Christ being the Head of it. Other things, of course, have to be added to express the full truth, but it is a question of persons, not simply what we know, or even the associations we are in and that, but persons, and persons that are attractive to each other. There is thus a real unity, and I believe the personality of the Lord as in a bodily form enters into it; "in him dwells all the fulness of the Godhead bodily". The word bodily implies substantiality. We cannot apply exactly the idea of substantiality to God, although there is substance, but we cannot go so far as to speak of a body; we can, however, in Christ, for He has become Man. In the first chapter the word bodily is not mentioned but that all the fulness was there. That is to say, the Deity or Godhead is there in itself, which we cannot compass. But when we come to chapter 2 the word bodily involves what Christ is to the saints. It means Christ, and it is a real Person here, and a Person who is a Centre and an Object. So I think all that must underlie what we have been speaking of and our being "united together". It is a question of persons, how much we are to one another, and the idea excludes all else as to what is in this world, where Satan is operating.

P.L. So that, after the allusions in the beginning of John 1 to the Deity we have in verse 14 "And the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us (and we have contemplated his glory, a glory as of an only-begotten with a father), full of grace and truth". We have no us or we introduced until that point. Is that the company?

J.T. Just so. "We have contemplated his glory". It is the glory of the Person in Manhood.

Ques. Does it help to notice the difference between the tenses in chapters 1 and 2 of Colossians? In chapter 1, it is "For in him all the fulness ... was pleased to dwell". I suppose that involved the Lord's humanity here, but

the verse we are looking at now in chapter 2 says, "For in him dwells all the fulness of the Godhead bodily; and ye are complete in him". Is one the reference to the past and the other a reference to the Lord as He is and bringing ourselves in?

J.T. Just so. The saints are brought in, for it is said, "and ye are complete in him, who is the head of all principality and authority", and so on. We have Christ thus in a substantial way before us and the brethren, not simply according to what we know. While we cannot perhaps name the thing as to which we are complete in Him, yet we can name the persons; we can name Christ. It is a substantial idea in relation to persons. Peter says, "Look on us". That is persons, not simply what we know or what we may be in that sense, but the persons. So in this chapter the thought of circumcision comes in immediately and then the raising of Christ from the dead; that is to say, the working of God. He is raised from the dead by the power or working of God. It is a question of what is going on through persons being affected and used, or handled in a sense, in view of something being formed. That is what would shut out all this material for the enemy which occasions the combat, because it is a question of the "increase of God", and that is in the assembly. We make increase in that sense, in the persons, and hence we have to consider who the persons are and what they are and how they behave. Is there anything to admire, because that is what this chapter has in mind? It shuts out all the material the enemy is working on in the whole world, because "the whole world", John says, "lies in the wicked one", 1 John 5:19. It is what is going on currently in the world, and we are to keep clear of it entirely. This chapter is to that end, so philosophy in the Greek system and Judaism in the Jewish system is kept out.

H.F.N. Have you not said that the bringing in of that thought of bodily and the introduction of the Lord's headship was really to bring about in the saints

a correspondence with Christ; first positionally, and then morally in the quickening?

J.T. Well, it is. The chapter is really to clear the ground for the assembly, where the increase of God is. The apostle had in his mind that they were growing together in unity, and all these things in verses 4 to 19 are subservient, to bring about the unity and to clear the ground for it. Hence you have the idea of nailing things to the cross. The death of Christ is brought in, in circumcision and then in the cross itself, but then we have the working of God and that is where faith enters into this chapter.

F.C.H. Is the working of God a present thing and not confined to what is stated afterwards in regard to the resurrection?

J.T. It is a question of the working. It is active power so that it is not simply something done, but being done. The chapter contemplates what is being done, what God is doing, His working, and so faith comes into it, as it says, "through faith of the working of God who raised him from among the dead". It is therefore a question of going into Canaan, I would say, and how in assembly formation and service there is something that enables us to keep ourselves so that we should be with God in Canaan, having entered in through circumcision and the power of God through the Jordan. The small portion of the earth called the land of Canaan is thus typical as a principle. It typifies our proximity in dwelling together spiritually, and nearness where love is, with an ascending character to it. That would lead us into Ephesians, of course, but Colossians is the crucial matter, because it is the working of God. It is not what is finished but what is being done, and the power that keeps us. It is the power that enables us to be in assembly so as to be for God in it.

Ques. Does "the increase of God", involving substance, stand in contrast to being "puffed up by his fleshly mind" which involves inflation and recalls what

the enemy says in Genesis 3, "ye shall be as gods", and then there is the reference to "a tree to be desired to make one wise"?

J.T. Yes. I believe the Lord is helping us at this very moment as to assembly formation and what interferes with it. How easily we may become the instruments of the interference; hence the strong language used; but that is a current matter. It is a current operation of God, which would apply to the assembly, not what will lead us into heaven literally, but assembly service.

L.H. Is that seen in Joshua when the ark remained in the bed of the Jordan while all the people passed over? Is that connected with "the working of God"?

J.T. Quite so. The ark was there so that they could pass over, and they did pass over; but then they had the circumcision there and the old corn of the land there. It is a question of appropriation, as to what is going on now, not when we are in heaven, but what we have now in assembly in view of the power of the Spirit. "The working of God" applies to the power of the Spirit in the saints.

P.H.H. You have referred to what is feminine; would Rahab, being in the land, be an example of what God is doing in providing for this in an abstract way in the midst of what is hostile?

J.T. Quite so. She is already there and she has the characteristics; she had the flax, and then the power in the cord. It is all a question of what God can use. It is His power but then it requires faith in us. Unless we bring in the element of faith then the working of God is not effective in us now. It is a question of what He will do in resurrection literally, but what He is doing now has all these features. If we take Rahab, she is in the land and she has flax. That is, there is a means of purity there and she has a means of letting the spies down and instructing them. She is in the thing for she knows what God has done. It was a question of what God had done

and what they had done, but now it is a question of what she is doing or what anyone like her is doing. God is operating and I believe the point in this chapter is the working of God in order to bring in conditions for assembly service at the present time, leading us to heavenly places in a spiritual sense.

Ques. So that "rejoicing and seeing your order" is what is taking place now?

J.T. That is right. That is what he observed in spirit. He was not there, but it shows what is current and that there is such a thing as knowing things without being there physically, for the spiritual thing is here.

L.E.S. Is not the footnote you quoted really the important matter, because it is a link with the last verse of chapter 1? The footnote to the word working in verse 12 says active internal power and then in the last verse of chapter 1 we have "according to his working, which works in me in power".

J.T. Very good. Chapter 1: 24 - 29, is what Paul was doing, but chapter 2 is what God is doing and that is what we have to keep in our minds if we are to have actual assembly service. That is to say, the spiritual matter; because the only power for it is the working of God and that involves the Spirit of God down here in the saints.

Eu.R. Would the word to Philadelphia: "thou hast a little power" be the working of it now?

J.T. I think so. I think the Lord is accrediting the saints in our times with that very thing. There is a little power and that little power must come into the assembly. It is not simply what is in our houses, it is what is in the assembly when we are sitting down together, how we can move on from the Lord's supper into heavenly places. It is a question of the power of God that is at work, but that must be in the Spirit.

W.C. Would the woman's experience in Mark 5 bear on it? She touched the hem of the Lord's garment

and it says she knew what had taken place in her. She has the experience of that coming into the soul.

J.T. Just so. Then when the Lord Himself came into the house of Jairus, it was a question of what He would do. They had the flute-players there, but such was the condition that they derided Him, and that may be the condition at any time in our localities. The Lord put them all out, and that makes way for what we are talking about, that is to say, the working of God. So He says, "Damsel, I say to thee, Arise". The idea of persons coming into life is what we want and how God does that in view of their having part in the assembly. Therefore it says, "he desired that something should be given her to eat". That was a matter for the parents to do.

Ques. Would you just say a word on the expression, "in whom also ye have been circumcised" (verse 11)? It seems a very strong expression and seems to link up with the presentation of Christ as the One in whom all the fulness of the Godhead dwells bodily.

J.T. It says, "In whom also ye have been circumcised with circumcision not done by hand, in the putting off of the body of the flesh, in the circumcision of the Christ; buried with him in baptism, in which ye have been also raised". The word whom is stronger than the word which and is in relation to circumcision, that is the actual death of Christ. It is a question of how far we come into that, but then baptism is linked on with it, and "in which" is used there. Baptism is a figure, but it is a figure not only of death but of resurrection. This chapter brings in the added thought that baptism carries with it the idea of resurrection. It does not carry it in Romans. There it is simply that we are dead with Christ, but here there is a figure of resurrection in baptism. We can therefore apply the idea to our children being baptised. If the power of God is there, they really have a place in resurrection in the sense in which the assembly is available to them. This chapter goes the whole length of the truth, in order to make

assembly service possible. We can take the ground of being risen with Christ, as it says, "Wherein also ye are risen"; but then in Ephesians it is said that He "has raised us up together, and has made us sit down together in the heavenlies", and we can go that far too. It is a question of the power we have, if we can speak intelligently as to the power we have, for assembly service; that we go beyond the Lord's supper and as having power, we can go into heavenly places. The power is the Spirit, so it is not a question of God as such, but of what is down here in the Spirit.

Ques. Does the idea of faith here suggest a certain objective line of things? Although the working of God is, in itself, subjective, would through the faith of it involve our being maintained in the light that has reached us of God's thoughts?

J.T. Well, just to guard the idea of the thing being all literal, it is a question of faith, for it is a faith system we are in. We shall not be in a faith system when we are in heaven, but now it is a question of how much we have. It is "through faith of the working of God"; and therefore it becomes a question of measure.

H.F.N. In regard to this thought of the working of God in relation to the resurrection sphere and in relation to the assembly service, what place does the ascension have?

J.T. That would be Ephesians, of course, and it is a question of how far we can go. In Ephesians there is quickening, which is making alive. Then we have to go to Ephesians for the formal thought of resurrection and ascension, and there we are said to have been raised up together and made to sit down together in the heavenlies; that would be an anticipative thought, and in assembly service we can anticipate things.

Ques. In the actual working out of assembly service, do we come together on the resurrection platform and are we led on to the plane of ascension?

J.T. I do not think there is a resurrection platform for the assembly. If there is a platform it would be an anticipative platform. We are entitled to anticipate things, and the Spirit of God supports us in our minds and affections to that end. Ephesians is an anticipative position; the platform is anticipative, that we are raised up together and made to sit down together in the heavenlies in Christ. So that I do not care about the idea of a resurrection platform. I know how much it is used, but I think we do well to keep to the full thought, if we are going to deal with faith and what belongs to faith, which is the present time. We are entitled to go to the full thought but it is a question of the power we have for it. Then that power should not only affect our minds but our affections, so that it extends to one another, it extends to the saints who are present.

P.L. In John 12, the distinguished persons there are each the fruit of divine and resurrection power and seen in relation to one another.

J.T. Lazarus was in mind. It says they came to see Lazarus also, which is just what I am trying to show. It is a question of real persons and substantiality and what we think of them, what they are to us in assembly.

Ques. Would you say a word as to verse 6, "As therefore ye have received the Christ, Jesus the Lord". What do these titles involve in our affections?

J.T. The thought is, "As therefore ye have received the Christ", and then the other words are additional or just to support this point. They received Christ, and He is "Jesus the Lord". Then they are to "walk in him, rooted and built up in him, and assured in the faith, even as ye have been taught, abounding in it with thanksgiving". The point is faith here. Of course, faith is light too, and we have instruction, but as I said before, it is a question of substantiality. The brethren will pardon me for repeating that word, but we are dealing with persons. The Lord Jesus is brought in here as a Person in a substantial sense as we have been saying;

this is involved in the word bodily. Christianity is thus a real thing, in which Christ is known to be "everything, and in all". We have real Christianity, but it is in the faith sphere. On the principle of faith everything is ours.

A.Al. Do we get that reference to substantiality in John 1, "the law was given by Moses: grace and truth subsists through Jesus Christ"?

J.T. I would say that.

SPIRITUAL FORMATION FOR ASSEMBLY SERVICE (4)

Colossians 2:9 - 23; Colossians 3:1 - 4; Joshua 5:2 - 9

J.T. It is thought that the types in Joshua will help us in the understanding of these sections of Colossians and so the verses read have been suggested. There it is a question of Israel, not having exactly entered the land, but in the act of entering it and it thus links with what has been stressed this morning as to what God is doing. It is not what He has done or will do, but what He is doing now and hence the application of this passage to us as we are here on the earth. That is why we dwelt upon it at such length, and yet we hardly finished what should be said about it, especially the position of Christ in chapter 2 as compared with the passage in chapter 1. They correspond in measure as to the word "fulness". We have here in verse 9, "in him dwells all the fulness of the Godhead bodily". The word bodily is added in order to bring out the idea of persons. It is not only what we may know, or be, in God's mind or in the minds of each other, but what we are in person, each one in his person. The assembly is composed of persons, and Christ is said to be Head of it. In chapter 1 of this book, it is formally stated that "he is the head of the body, the assembly". The word body carries with it the idea of persons, but in a substantial sense and in the aggregate. Among many other distinctions, Christ has the place of headship to the body; the word assembly being added. Then this passage alludes formally to the Person of Christ in a bodily sense. The question of our bodies must therefore come up if we are rightly to understand the passage and this must include our connections, relations or associations and what we are in appearance as well as what we are in our minds. Circumcision is introduced in Joshua, after they had crossed the Jordan. The enormous number of those who died in the wilderness,

possibly six hundred thousand, actual death being administered to them so that their carcases fell in the wilderness, would point to the force of circumcision. As to those who go into Canaan, their bodies are affected by circumcision and not literal death. Circumcision is not in the head, it is a question of their bodies in a general sense and it obviously points to the number that were slain. Thus death, in a moral sense, takes the place of literal death which the great number in Israel endured. Circumcision therefore for us now is not a rite or ceremony or something to be administered, such as baptism; it is the death of Christ that is in mind. It is real death, and that we come into it in a moral sense, and hence have passed out of the world. So the word later is, "for ye have died".

P.H.H. Referring to the word bodily, do you mean that the "fulness of the Godhead" dwells in Christ's own personal body as Man?

J.T. Yes.

P.H.H. Would you say just a little more about the term substantiality in that connection.

J.T. Well, He is a real Man. Here, I think, it is to stress the reality of His manhood, as over against certain current ideas and that "as he is, so are we", 1 John 4:17. He is a real Man with the faculties and feelings of a man, but withal in that outwardly small compass; not inwardly small, because there is no measure of the inward side; but, in that outwardly small compass, the fulness of the Godhead dwelt.

A.N.W. Is that why John begins his epistle with the word That rather than He as at the beginning of his gospel?

J.T. Well, I think that is just the point. John brings that out; he begins with the neuter: "That ... which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes". It is the reality of His manhood. He was a real Person, a real Man. It would be very much to John himself, because John lay in His bosom.

P.H.H. Is it clear that in some connections the word fulness refers to the complete expression of a thing? Here would you take it to mean more, that it is all that is inward and completely immeasurable?

J.T. Just so. Instead of the word expression, it is, as you say, all that is there. So the first chapter of Hebrews, as we had it this morning, reads: "by whom also he made the worlds". That is to say, it is from eternity, and then "who being the effulgence of his glory and the expression of his substance". The word substance, according to the note, is essential being, not person, and the note adds, It is of God, not of the Father. That is to say, it is the expression of the substance of God, what He is substantially. Substantiality is the word we have been using, and Christ, as the passage says, is the expression of His substance. It is not exactly representation, but expression, the expression of His substance, which is beyond the creature's power to compass, or ever to name, what God is essentially, in His own being.

Ques. In "the expression of his substance", does the word expression mean that it is something for us to take in?

J.T. Well, it is a question of who we are and who are the persons in mind, because it would be angels too, the whole realm of intelligence, I would say. Yet it cannot be said that the thing is properly understood, because it is infinite and inscrutable.

W.H. Would the expression, "seen of angels" come in in that connection?

J.T. Quite so. It says, "seen of angels ... believed on in the world, received up into glory", 1 Timothy 3:16.

A.Al. The word announcing His birth is "that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God", Luke 1:35. Would that involve what is substantial?

J.T. Yes, it would. The word thing there is to be noted; "that holy thing which shall be born of thee". The Spirit of God has that way of dealing with matters at times. He does not go so far as we might think. His way is just to avoid certain things as needed. Later the Lord was circumcised and His name is given. He was called Jesus, but "that holy thing" is to bring out what was there in a substantial sense.

Ques. Do you see any connection between verse 9 of our chapter and John 17:5, "and now glorify me, thou Father, along with thyself, with the glory which I had along with thee before the world was"?

J.T. Yes, there is, only that in the latter case the Lord was in the form of God; what we are dealing with here is in the form of man. John 17:5 is what He was in Deity, before incarnation, but here we are dealing purposely with the incarnation, so that it might be understood that there is a real Person and that the fulness of the Godhead is in Him, "for in him dwells all the fulness of the Godhead bodily". The word dwells too is to be noted. It is not simply that it is in Him, but it dwells there, the Godhead dwells there.

L.E.S. What would be the difference between "expression of his substance" in Hebrews 1 and "God is a Spirit" in John 4?

J.T. Well, we cannot go beyond that. "God is a Spirit". God is that, and He has to be worshipped in that sense. It is to bring out the need in ourselves of the knowledge of God and of who He is and what He is and that we know therefore how to worship. It is who we worship. We worship God, but then we worship the Father, and we worship the Son. The point there is that God is a Spirit, and that thought should enter into our worship so that our worship must be spiritual.

Ques. I would like to ask why the word "bodily" is used in chapter 2 when it has reference to the present place of the Lord Jesus, in contrast with the place that He had here as Man.

J.T. Well, it could come in there also, for it was true when He was here. It was true from the time of the incarnation as to fact.

Ques. Is it not the fact here, that the truth is brought forward in its bearing on ourselves, for it goes on to say, "ye are complete in him". Does not Mr. Darby's note to verse 10 connect the two?

J.T. Yes. The link is strong as to substantiality and personality of which we have been speaking, and bears on the assembly, because later in the chapter it says, "the body is of Christ" (verse 17), and then "not holding fast the head, from whom all the body, ministered to and united together by the joints and bands, increases with the increase of God". The body is thus in mind in all this and what God effects in it; hence the importance of what has been said about substantiality. The assembly is formed of persons of which Christ could be Head, or is Head. That is, there is in that sense a correspondence between the Head and the body, but all in the sense of substantiality as over against chapter 1 where the word bodily is not found.

W.H. Would the thought of bodily stress the substantiality that the saints have now in Christ where He is?

J.T. Well, just so. The very existence of the body depends on Christ where He is, dead and risen and glorified. The assembly is out of Him, Genesis 2:23. It says, "the body is of Christ". It is a substantial thought, it is composed of persons such as ourselves. That raises the question as to how we regard each other and what we are as in that position. It is the position or sphere in which the divine operations are being carried on, and hence the thoughts of circumcision and baptism that follow and the faith of the operation of God or the working of God. That is to say, He is operating on the principle of faith. It is not what we shall be by-and-by, but what we are now, as we are now in faith. God is operating in us on the principle of faith, because we are

in a faith period. We are not in a risen condition, in an eternal period or in eternal conditions, we are in the faith condition, and God is pleased to operate in the faith period. It is in view of bringing about a condition in which we can abstract ourselves from what we are morally in this world, to be abstractly what we are in Christ, and that is the basis on which assembly service is to be carried on. Hence the position of the ark in Jordan and all that follows as seen in Joshua 5 and other parts of Joshua help greatly in the elucidating of the truth in this epistle of Colossians.

A.J.E. Would the idea of substantiality be seen in Acts 5, the shadow of Peter falling upon the sick?

J.T. Just so. You could hardly have a shadow without a substance. That shows the value of the saints, which we have already touched on. Peter in the beginning of Acts, with John, says to the lame man who was to be healed, "Look on us", that is on John and Peter. There was something there in those two persons, and that is really what is in mind in all that is being said as to substantiality in persons. We are to learn to look on each other and regard each other accordingly, because there is little or no value in dealing with the body, save in the sense that we are the persons themselves, at least we are of them. We are real persons in whom God is working, so that we are objects of affection to one another. That is what is in mind, and that is what this passage has in mind too; it is to bring out the reality of Christianity.

W.S.S. That is the great mystery of it, I presume, "Christ in you the hope of glory". He is here substantially in persons today?

J.T. Quite so. According to the last verse of chapter 1 God was working in Paul but now He is working in us and it is on the principle of faith: "through faith of the working of God who raised him from among the dead".

E.C.M. Would you say a word on the expression "united together by the joints and bands, increases with the increase of God", as connected with "being united together in love".

J.T. Well, it all bears on the same thing. The joints and bands are not in the head, they are in a general way in the body. Although it is enlarged on a little more in Ephesians than it is here, it brings out the full idea of a body, of the human body, and that Christ has a body, only that He is divine, He is God in it.

G.H.M. While you are speaking of this matter of bodily, would you say a word as to its application to the Spirit in Luke?

J.T. The word bodily there cannot be said to be in the sense in which it is spoken of Christ. The Holy Spirit has not a human body; it is just that the form was there. He took that form, so that it could be attested by John; as it is said in John 1:32, that John beheld the Spirit descending. It was a question of testimony and hence what could be seen. So in the beginning of the epistle; "That which ... we have seen with our eyes; that which we contemplated, and our hands handled", and so forth, is to bring out the reality of the humanity of Christ.

We are endeavouring to get at the abstract position, the essential position that the chapter contemplates. There is what is in Christ, in His body, in a bodily sense, and how we correspond with it. Then we have the working of God; first, that we are circumcised in His circumcision, and then that we are baptised, not in His baptism, but baptised just in the ordinary sense, and that baptism in this chapter, as we have remarked, carries with it the idea of resurrection. It is not resurrection as a full basis of things but simply that they are viewed as risen. "Wherein also ye are risen", as it says, "through the faith of the operation of God". Then, if we are that, if we are risen by the faith of the operation of God, well then we can proceed to what is found in

Ephesians, where it is not only that we are risen, but quickened and raised and seated in the heavenlies. Ephesians goes all the way and is anticipative, whereas Colossians is not anticipative. It contemplates us as we are, what is current at the present moment. That is to say, instead of being in the land, we are entering it, and Joshua 5 shows what happens in the entering. There was need for circumcision, and we are told that they made stone knives or swords of rocks. The idea of the sword is used, which means there is a real cutting off, and not only a cutting off but a rolling away of the reproach of Egypt. The word rolling is to convey the thought of the total rolling away of the reproach of Egypt. Before there could be the eating of the old corn of the land, that has to take place, and it takes place in the entering, at the time of entering into Canaan.

S.B. In regard to what happened when Elijah was taken up, Elisha asks for a double portion of his spirit and Elijah's answer is: "If thou see me when I am taken from thee, it shall be so to thee; but if not, it shall not be so". And Elisha sees Elijah taken up and when he comes back the sons of the prophets say: "The spirit of Elijah rests on Elisha".

J.T. I am glad you have brought up that, because it is just a question of what we are saying. It is what is current, what God is doing. The great thought is the operation of God and all these things enter into it, having in view that the service of God should exist and go on.

Ques. Would the practical effect of the apprehension of this amongst the saints be that we learn to dispense with all that is not of Christ?

J.T. Well, just so. It is really a question of displacement and hiding and so you have here a striking word in verse 14, "having effaced the handwriting in ordinances which stood out against us, which was contrary to us, He has taken it also out of the way". I am referring to "out of the way" and effacement. God has operated to take

things that would hinder us out of the way and to take them out of the way judicially. We can thus see that they are dealt with and dealt with for ever so that they should not hinder us. Then there are many things besides that are hindering us that are not mentioned here, that God would have us remove and take out of the way. Such things as associations that are not proper to Christians and many other things like that; so that instead of God as it were taking them out of the way judicially, we take them out of the way too, in a practical sense, so that they should not hinder us.

L.E.S. So that Paul's word in Philippians 3, agrees with this, "See to dogs, see to evil workmen, see to the concision. For we are the circumcision".

J.T. Quite so. See to it and have it attended to; that is the thing.

H.P.W. Is it displacement by death?

J.T. The circumcision of Christ is the death of Christ. Although we have literal baptism, we have no literal circumcision, but we do have spiritual circumcision, and that is what the apostle means. It is the application of death, hence he says: "for ye have died". The first verse of chapter 3 is really hypothetical; it says, "If therefore ye have been raised with the Christ, seek the things which are above, where the Christ is, sitting at the right hand of God: have your mind on the things that are above, not on the things that are on the earth; for ye have died". He is dealing with that and he alludes to the circumcision of Christ.

Ques. Would the importance of what you are saying be stressed in Joshua 5 when Jehovah says "circumcise again ... the second time"?

J.T. Just so. I think it points to what was so very real with the Israelites for six hundred thousand of them died in the wilderness. The word carcases is used as to them, and then the word bones in the warnings against defilement shows that the reality of death was there.

Hence the second circumcision is to stress that, for the young people that were born had not been circumcised and they should be. It was to stress in their minds that their forefathers had died because of self-will that is the idea of it. Death is a real matter and it can be brought to bear on young people now and upon all of us that death will come if we persist in ministering to the flesh. Now circumcision forestalls that, and we are able to enter on the service of God because we are raised through the operation of God, on the principle of faith.

W.H. Would circumcision, in that way, have particularly in view what is spiritual as suggested in the inheritance?

J.T. Quite so. They were already entering on it really. They had actually laid their feet on it, but still they are not regarded as having gone up definitely, because Jericho is still in the way. They had to go through the thing in themselves; that is to say, the actual figure of death, accepted in the true sense of it.

P.H.H. What place would the stones have in connection with what you are saying? There were the stones in the Jordan and then stones placed on the other side.

J.T. I think the stones in the Jordan are just a type of where we were; where Israel was and where we were in death. The setting up of these stones was done by Joshua himself, as it says in the ninth verse of the fourth chapter, "And twelve stones did Joshua set up in the midst of the Jordan, in the place where the feet of the priests who bore the ark of the covenant had stood firm; and they are there to this day". That is to say, they are there as a testimony. Jordan has returned to overflow its banks, and the whole force of death is there but, nevertheless, they are there. Then what precedes that is, "And it came to pass when the whole nation had completely gone over the Jordan, that Jehovah spoke to Joshua, saying, Take you twelve men out of the people, one man out of every tribe, and command them, saying,

Take up hence out of the midst of the Jordan, from the place where the priests' feet stood firm, twelve stones, and carry them over with you, and lay them down in the lodging-place where ye shall lodge this night. And Joshua called the twelve men, whom he had appointed of the children of Israel, a man out of every tribe; and Joshua said to them, Pass before the ark of Jehovah your God into the midst of the Jordan, and lift up each of you a stone and put it upon his shoulder, according to the number of the tribes of the children of Israel, that this may be a sign in your midst. When your children ask hereafter, saying, What mean ye by these stones? then ye shall say to them, That the waters of the Jordan were cut off before the ark of the covenant of Jehovah; when it went through the Jordan, the waters of the Jordan were cut off. And these stones shall be for a memorial unto the children of Israel for ever", Joshua 4:1 - 7. That means, as applied to ourselves, that we are risen with Christ. We are entitled to regard it so, but that is not the whole position, for according to Ephesians we are raised up together and made to sit down together in the heavenlies, but Colossians does not go that far. What we are saying therefore as to Joshua greatly helps us as to Colossians for the bearing of resurrection in Colossians has the heavenly position in view. We have to realise the power of resurrection, which is "the working of God"; that is, the energy of God; His active power. Paul says, "ye have been raised with him through faith of the working of God who raised him from among the dead". That is to stress the power of resurrection entering into the service of God, and that it is realisable by us, when we are actually in the service, because we have the Spirit. Without the Spirit it could not be realisable, it could only be a theory or a doctrine. The Spirit makes it a real fact, so that we are affected thus and really in the enjoyment of association with Christ.

P.L. So that spiritual alacrity marks Abraham after circumcision, for he runs and then he ministers to

divine tastes at the tent door. Would that suggest the service of God?

J.T. Quite so. It was a real scene of activity and Abraham was a servant in active service. Sarah is brought into it, although she did not just fulfil her part in it, yet she is brought into it and the young men are brought into it as well, and so forth.

G.W.B. Would you say a word as to the distinction between baptism and circumcision.

J.T. Well, circumcision is just a real figure of the death of Christ. It is never applied to the Christian, nor is it brought into Christianity as baptism is. It is just a figure of the death of Christ, and that we are circumcised in it, in Him. Baptism is also a figure of the death of Christ, but it is a figure of the resurrection of Christ as well, as it says here, "Wherein also ye are risen". All that bears on the service of God as showing what we may be as sitting down together in the assembly.

Ques. When he speaks of being quickened in verse 13, he says quickened together. Is that the point where we touch true collective ground, in the consciousness of this relation?

J.T. Very good. I think it is, because we are greatly tested as to what we think of each other. One would always challenge oneself in sitting down with the brethren as to what one thinks about them, because it is a question of what we are, and the Lord comes to us according to what we are. We expect Him to come, but He has in mind what we are, we are persons that are attractive to Him.

Ques. Would you judge that there were those conditions in the assembly at Antioch according to Acts 13?

J.T. Well, I think that is right, because they are called Christians. It is a term that signifies what they are, that is to say, they are "of Christ". It just indicates that the saints at Antioch were fully in these matters; they were fully in the truth of Christianity.

F.C.H. What would be the relation of the younger generation in regard of circumcision? No uncircumcised person was to eat of the passover and yet it says that "all the people that were born in the wilderness on the way, after they came out of Egypt, them had they not circumcised". Does that bear on what you are saying as to the young people?

J.T. Well, quite so. It is really what we are aiming at in the main, because most of the dear brethren that are in mind here are young and perhaps not fully initiated in the truth of Christianity. One knows no passage more important than the epistle to Colossians as to the reality of Christianity, and how we are to get into it. We are told in these scriptures how we are to get into it, and the types, particularly that in Joshua, help us greatly.

Ques. What is the thought of spoiling principalities and powers?

J.T. It would mean that they would be hostile principalities and powers; that is what Satan has built up. It is more fully entered on in Ephesians, but here they are spoiled.

A.H.G. Why does it say that they are made a show of publicly?

J.T. Well, I suppose to bring out that the power of God is operative against the world. Presently, as the book of Revelation shows us, there will be a great conflict between Michael and the devil. There will be an actual conflict. No such thing as a conflict in heaven has ever been seen before, and the devil will be cast out of heaven for ever. He is not cast out yet, and that is a very solemn thing and that is why we have so much conflict, so much combat. It is spoken of so much here and we have to struggle in this matter because of many things in our circumstances and our houses, and the like, that cause combat, the devil taking advantage of circumstances in which we are.

A.H.G. You spoke earlier of making way for the assembly. Is what is here linked with that thought?

J.T. Well, it is. "Taken it also out of the way", is the very word that conveys it to us. Something is in the way and it may be in any one of us. In what is alluded to here, it is said that God has taken it out of the way, because it is God here: "Having effaced the handwriting in ordinances which stood out against us", that is ordinances stood out against us, they were contrary to us, "He has taken it also out of the way, having nailed it to the cross". That is all judicial; it is the death of Christ, but then there are other things that are not mentioned here that are very practical and it raises the question as to what we may do in removing them. One could mention many things but the general thought is that there are things which we can deal with ourselves; things that hinder us and if we do not deal with them they will continue to hinder us.

J.G. Would the graveclothes of Lazarus come in in that connection?

J.T. Just so. The Lord told them to loose him and let him go. The Lord said in effect that he would not be able to go unless they loosed him. They had to do that, for Lazarus himself could not have done it, but there are things that we can do ourselves, and that is just what is in mind, let us do them.

E.E.P. In Exodus 33:11 it says "Joshua ... a young man, departed not from within the tent". Would that show definitely how to become a skilled man in order to enter with vigour and strength, on Colossian ground?

J.T. Many, who perhaps do not know it, are held by things that could easily be taken out of the way. It is not that we should wait on God to do it judicially, because things are not dealt with in that sense. Such things as evil associations that we link on with, business associations and companionship and especially mixed marriages; all of these things are to be dealt with by the persons involved, or we will be hampered by them.

Ques. Would the word that the apostle writes to the saints at Corinth enter into what you are bringing before us? "Do ye not know that your body is the temple of the Holy Spirit which is in you, which ye have of God; and ye are not your own? for ye have been bought with a price: glorify now then God in your body", 1 Corinthians 6:19, 20.

J.T. Quite so. How many things there are that we can deal with ourselves! The Colossian epistle is to help us to deal with ourselves where there are hindrances. God has done certain things for us; He has taken things out of the way, and gone so far as nailing them to the cross. We might therefore do very well, too, to nail them to something, so that they should never be taken up again.

Ques. Does it help in verse 14 to see that the collective position is the real point of the attack in the associations to which you have referred? Whilst the individual has to take them up this way, it is against us that they stand out and "contrary to us".

J.T. Quite so. As regards sins and as regards quickening in verse 13 it is said, "And you, being dead in offences and in the uncircumcision of your flesh, he has quickened together with him, having forgiven us all the offences; having effaced the handwriting in ordinances which stood out against us, which was contrary to us he has taken it also out of the way, having nailed it to the cross; having spoiled principalities and authorities he made a show of them publicly, leading them in triumph by it". All that would allude to what God has done and what God alone could do. But then we are speaking of what we can do, too. God has taken things out of the way judicially, but there are things that we may allow and not take them out of the way and, of course, we never get on in the truth accordingly.

G.C.S. Does Paul enumerate some of them in Philippians 3, when he speaks of counting all things but dung that he might win Christ? That follows on what he had said about circumcision.

J.T. Yes, quite so. He had a purpose in what he was doing and that was that he might have Christ for gain. That scripture is very important in regard of what we are saying, Paul had such a purpose in what he was doing.

W.H. So he says here, "Let no one fraudulently deprive you of your prize". It comes home to us in that way.

A.J.M. Have you any thought about Zipporah in regard of Moses? The Lord sought to slay him and she said, "A bloody husband indeed art thou to me! ... because of the circumcision", Exodus 4:25, 26.

J.T. That is a remarkable passage indeed, because he neglected the circumcision for his son, and Jehovah thought to slay him, showing how serious it was. So here, "Let none therefore judge you in meat or in drink, or in matter of feast, or new moon, or sabbaths, which are a shadow of things to come; but the body is of Christ. Let no one fraudulently deprive you of your prize", whatever it may be, "doing his own will in humility and worship of angels, entering into things which he has not seen". That shows that we may get into these things religiously, such as Romanism would instruct us in. Even heathen eastern religion might creep in and hinder us, and there are many other such things in the surrounding religions, such as the Established Church, where customs are practised that would hinder us unless we judge them and cease doing them. So it goes on to say, speaking of the false worshipping of angels, that such a person was "entering into things which he has not seen, vainly puffed up by the mind of his flesh", showing what all this means, the mind of man's flesh working in the things of God. Then we have "and not holding fast the head", that is to say, Christ the Head of the assembly, for Christ is Head of the body, "from whom all the body, ministered to and united together by the joints and bands, increases with the increase of God". All these instructions are very clear and are very obvious, and,

if in any way we are ignoring them, we will be hindered in entering into the truth of the assembly and the service of God.

A.H.G. Would you say a word on the expression: "but the body is of Christ".

J.T. It is just the thought that, as Eve was taken out of Adam, so the assembly is taken out of Christ. That is really what is meant, "the body is of Christ".

A.N.W. Does it emphasise the matter of substance again in contrast to shadow? In verse 17 it says certain things are a shadow but then it says the body is of Christ. I wondered whether that involved the substance again.

J.T. These customs and religions around us are nothing at all; they have no force at all religiously, I mean to say in the spiritual sense. But then when the word comes in "the body is of Christ" we have a substantial thing, for it is referring to the persons who form the body and that they are taken out of Christ. It is not simply so many persons born, but persons in whom God has wrought, persons whom He has quickened and made to live together.

J.M. Would the reference to the handwriting in ordinances being effaced indicate that they are no longer necessary because the body is of Christ?

J.T. Quite so. "The body is of Christ" means it is a substantial thought. It is referring to ourselves, to Christians, the only circle of persons who are really of any account to God, to heaven. All else is simply in the way. Of course, there are natural connections, associations or links which we have to recognise, but they do not continue; the assembly does continue, for it is an abiding thing.

P.L. It is a deathless company, is it not?

J.T. Quite so. Deathless is a good word for it.

W.S.S. It "increases with the increase of God".

P.H.H. Would there be a warning in connection with all this in Achan hiding the wedge of gold and the

Babylonish garment in his tent? That is, while positionally risen with Christ, yet we may be going on with the elements of the world?

J.T. Yes. He stole them and hid them, and, of course, suffered accordingly.

P.H.H. It is said of him that he dissembled.

J.T. Quite so. They represented the world. On the other hand, there were certain things in Jericho, such as metals, that, in themselves, represented what was of God and that is another matter.

Ques. Does Gideon represent the idea of dealing with things that are not right, in that he deals with them first in his father's house? He destroyed things that were inconsistent with the thoughts of God for His people.

J.T. On the other hand, when he would use the gold of the persons he had overcome to make an idol, there was failure. How easily we can drop into what is wrong after being so characterised by what is right!

Eu.R. Do the twelve stones taken out of the Jordan and reared up on the land side link on at all with the thought of Christ's brethren; a company of His own order, a heavenly company?

J.T. Quite so. They link on with ourselves in that they are types of ourselves. They are types of the assembly, that we are risen with Christ.

Eu.R. Does not that help us to enter into the thought of being His body and responding to Him?

J.T. Quite so. That we are risen with Christ helps us in participating in the service of God. That is in Colossians and resurrection is only on the way, as we have already remarked, for Colossians is entering. They have not yet fully entered, and so it is that the full truth of the service of God requires Ephesians as well as Colossians. We are thus able to go the whole way, and it is a question therefore of the power of the Spirit operating in our hearts and minds. We are able to sit down together in assembly and lay hold of the fact that we are risen with Christ and not only so, but that we are raised

up and seated in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus, because we have to go the whole way. God would have us to go the whole way; and unless we reach heaven, sitting in heavenly places, we do not go the whole way. In order to go the whole way we have to go through this chapter and that is why one is stressing it so much. God has done His part in removing things that would stand in our way; but then do we remove the things that we know are standing in our way?

You have in the next paragraph, verse 20 of chapter 2, "If ye have died with Christ from the elements of the world, why as if alive in the world do ye subject yourselves to ordinances". The thought of subject yourselves would be that you are holding on to what is in the way, and so then he explains what he means, "Do not handle", that is what people would say in that sense. "Do not taste, do not touch", and then the bracket "(things which are all for destruction in the using of them:)", That is to say, they are really nothing all, they have nothing to do with the service that we are professing to hold. Then he goes on, "according to the injunctions and teachings of men", and then again a parenthesis, "Which have indeed an appearance of wisdom in voluntary worship, and humility, and harsh treatment of the body", (and we know something about that in certain systems) "not in a certain honour". That means they do not respect what is due to the human body; then the bracket ends; then, "to the satisfaction of the flesh". That is to say, the flesh wishes all these things religiously, and every one of them is in the way. They become an occasion of religious pride, because we have them and because we practise them.

A.M. Does the word in Hebrews 12 link on with it, "laying aside every weight, and sin which so easily entangles us"?

J.T. Just so. That is just the point; "laying aside every weight", whatever the weights may be, as well as "the sin which so easily entangles us".

SPIRITUAL FORMATION FOR ASSEMBLY SERVICE (5)

Colossians 3:1 - 17

J.T. It is clear that the part of the chapter read involves the conclusion, in the apostle's mind, of the doctrinal part of the epistle. It therefore reverts back to chapter 2 especially, again recalling what we have had before us as to the crucial side of the subject and the place death has in these chapters. In chapter 3 (including what is said of it in chapter 2) the allusion is to baptism. It is, as it were, what each one of us has had our hand in, for baptism enters into Christianity as a public sign as over against the Passover or circumcision in Israel. Death is spoken of in the second chapter as the state we were in by nature. We were dead, in that sense; not exactly judicially, but as to our state. Then we have burial added, which baptism conveys, and also the thought of resurrection. Romans does not carry the thought of baptism as far as resurrection, but Colossians does. Paul in Colossians is aiming at the saints moving on to heavenly things in view of the service of God, and so it adds the thought of resurrection to the idea of baptism, evidently in order to complete the thought in view of the service of God. We can take the ground of being risen, although resurrection is not final, nor is it basic exactly, but it is in view of ascension. We cannot have Christianity, either in a public or private way, except on the ground of ascension. This chapter leads on to it and, especially in view of the Lord's supper, we are entitled to take the place of being risen; that is in the sense of being wholly free of the world. The idea of burial is that we are out of sight, but being raised is added, according to the twelfth verse of chapter 2. Then in verse 20 we have a hypothetical thought, which is a previous one to the one we have in chapter 3. It says, "If ye have died with Christ from the elements of the

world, why as if alive in the world do ye subject yourselves to ordinances?". Ordinances have a great place especially in Episcopalian countries. This country has a National Church, and ordinances are almost legalised; they become part of the religious profession of the people. So that the "therefore", which is sequential in chapter 3, is of prime importance as to the service of God, which must be wholly free from mere ordinances and, however much we might add the thought of ritual to the things that are to be done in the Lord's supper, there is no thought of it properly. The Lord's supper should be done with intelligence, of course, and the apostle addresses himself to our intelligence in speaking of it in Corinthians, but it should be done as simply as possible. It is a simple thought involving "simplicity as to the Christ". So that the less formality there is, save what is warranted in Scripture, the better.

P.H.H. I do not quite follow your reference to "having died" and here "being raised with Christ". Are you connecting that with a certain preparation of mind, having the Lord's supper in view?

J.T. Yes, in view of the latter part of it, I would say. We are not on resurrection ground in partaking of the Lord's supper itself, but we are entitled to take that place after the memorial, leading on to the heavenly side of things. To complete our position we must refer to Ephesians, which tells us that we are raised up together and made to sit down together in the heavenlies in Christ. I am speaking of what follows the taking of the emblems, included in the Supper, because the Lord's supper is undoubtedly in the wilderness; it has to be taken in that position.

Ques. Does it help at all to see the objective the Lord has before Him? It says in John 13, "Now before the feast of the Passover, Jesus, knowing that ... he should depart out of this world to the Father". And then a little later on "knowing that ... he came out from God and was going to God". Then we have His service

that His saints may have part with Him, but it seems that that great objective is always in His mind.

J.T. Well, what is to be said there is that John 14 contemplates His coming to us, which is a matter to be considered in view of the idea of the memorial in the Lord's supper. He says, "I will not leave you orphans, I am coming to you", and we count on that, that the Lord comes to us. It contemplates that He is moving out of heaven. He moves, on the first day of the week, towards the brethren, towards the assembly. I should say properly that He moves toward the assemblies, and that raises the whole question as to whether He is remembered in heaven or whether we have in view that He is near. In Luke 24:36 we are told that "as they were saying these things, he himself stood in their midst". It is not said that He came as in John 20, but implies that He was near and ready to manifest Himself as the time for it arrived. He thus moves towards us, as we might properly say now, spiritually. Indeed it is just spiritually now, but still there is an actual movement involving His part on the earth where the sufferings are.

L.E.S. Would what you are saying link on with what we were considering on Lord's day afternoon as to the suffering side connected with the wilderness?

J.T. Yes, just so. The Lord is viewed, you might say, as He was here. As risen from the dead, He moved here for forty days. But then 1 Corinthians 15 says that He appeared to certain ones, and one of them was Paul. "Last of all", he says, "he appeared to me also". So that it must not only involve what He was in the forty days, but also what He is now as in heaven. He takes on these liberties, either spiritually or corporeally, so that He is free to be with us at any time, as He was with Paul. What we are saying now is of the highest importance, because it means that the Lord is free and it avoids our assuming that His position is static or stationary. He is active and from the Colossian point of view especially, because Colossians does not stress ascension. Paul

speaks of what might have been known in the early days before He went up, and also what might have been known even after He went up, because we do know from 1 Corinthians 15 that He appeared to certain ones, including Paul.

Ques. Would it be right to say that as we come into the position of being raised with Christ following the Supper, the Lord comes to us in that position?

J.T. I should not like to go so far as to say that it is the resurrection position. It was only a resurrection position as regards Himself in the forty days, and yet He moved about amongst them, not assuming that they were risen, but that they were in ordinary circumstances down here. The chapter we are dealing with contemplates us as risen, but that is an allusion to baptism; that is to say what resurrection means as seen in baptism. That is the ground that we may take in faith, because the faith position is really of the first importance in this epistle. If it be a question of faith, it is the ground we can take, because of the idea of resurrection being involved in baptism.

Rem. I was thinking of the resurrection position in regard to ourselves in the light of your remarks about "through faith of the working of God", having that in our souls. You were suggesting that God is operating in the light of the resurrection of Christ.

J.T. Well, that would come in properly after the emblems are partaken of, because the Supper includes both the emblems and they both refer to the memorial of Christ. That cannot apply to Him as come amongst us. That is what I understand, because the Lord's supper is properly in the wilderness and refers to persons, as we are, in flesh and blood, including brothers and sisters.

Ques. Would the expression, "Have your mind on the things that are above", confirm what you are saying?

J.T. Well, just so. "Not on the things that are on the earth", which shows that we are on the earth in fact.

Ques. Does the Lord come personally or by the Spirit?

J.T. Well, both these things are true if you take the whole dispensation into account. He came personally to them after He rose. We are told He came personally and we see it in the first chapter of Acts. But then, as we have said, we see it in 1 Corinthians 15. John 14 would contemplate more the spiritual side. When it says, "I am coming to you", it is left open, and I think it would cover the whole dispensation right down to the present moment. I doubt the wisdom of bringing forward the corporeal side, because there is hardly anything in Scripture to indicate that anyone experienced the Lord's coming in this sense, although Paul said that He appeared to him, and even later in his service, the Lord actually stood by him and said, "Be of good cheer, Paul: for as thou hast testified of me in Jerusalem, so must thou bear witness also at Rome", Acts 23:11. But then in saying that, why should we not accept the liberty the Lord takes, in that sense, at any time, if He is pleased to do so? To say that we have not experienced it, will not be enough; it is a question of what liberty the Lord may take, for He is a divine Person.

Ques. Are we to take the position of being raised with Christ all the time?

J.T. Not if we are dealing with the order of the service of God. In introducing the Lord's supper in 1 Corinthians, Paul does not contemplate that we are risen with Christ. He contemplates us as in flesh and blood condition, and that Christ is absent. When we are eating and drinking, doing our work and so forth, we are simply in ordinary flesh and blood condition, although, of course, in the light of salvation. Therefore the position we are in is not any different from the millennial position, for the millennial position will imply a flesh and blood state among men. What will happen eventually we have to work out from other scriptures, but that will be the millennial condition and it will show

what God can do in men as they are, in spite of what Satan has done. Of course, Satan then will be bound. He is not bound now but, at the same time, the Spirit is in us. We have the Spirit now, and the Spirit enables us to move about as men in the flesh. The word "in the flesh" is just a form to show that we are not literally raised, we are in flesh and blood conditions. Then, added to that, we have the thought of the service of God properly. This is not continually going on; it is special, and we are entitled to take the ground of being risen and even ascended according to the state we may be in, not simply theoretically, but actually, for the Spirit of God may support us in such a way that we are conscious that we are with Christ and that we have part with Christ together in a collective sense.

Ques. When you speak of the Lord being absent, does that convey the thought that He is in heaven, or that He is not yet in the assembly?

J.T. Not necessarily in heaven. It may be said in a formal way that He is "gone into heaven, angels and authorities and powers being subjected to him", and that He is "at the right hand of God"; but that does not set aside the fact that He is personally free to do what He pleases.

Rem. I was thinking of the end of Matthew, "Lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world".

J.T. Well, that is true. That is Matthew's view and he is the only one that says that. He never says the Lord ascended and that is to bring out the great fact of the assembly in its functions down here, the local assembly, and then the general idea of it, that the Lord is with us all the time. It is a very comforting thought. So we have such expressions in Matthew, as "where two or three are gathered together unto my name, there am I in the midst of them" (Matthew 18:20) meaning it is a local position.

E.J.M. Is that what you had in mind when you spoke earlier about the Lord coming to the assembly, and then added that He comes to the assemblies, that is, the plural?

J.T. Well, both are true. Matthew 18 contemplates that where two or three are gathered together unto His name there He is in the midst of them. That does not mean the whole assembly; it is a local company, it is two or three. Then in John 14 we have, "I will not leave you orphans, I am coming to you". It is left in an indefinite sense, but the fact is there that He is at liberty to do so. Why should we not recognise that? A divine Person can never be limited, but must be free to do what He pleases.

G.F.G. In connection with this matter of the service of God and our being enabled to take our place as being raised with Christ, is that something more than we were considering yesterday in regard of being raised through faith of the working of God?

J.T. The allusion is to the same thing, only that the latter thought (that is what we are dealing with now) is more definite. In the second chapter we have: "ye have been also raised with him through faith of the working of God who raised him". That is a statement of a present fact, that we can take that ground. But then, when should we take it? There ought to be intelligence in our movements and in what we do in the service of God. As we come from our houses and sit down together to partake of the Lord's supper, it is not then the time to introduce that passage in Colossians 2; it belongs to a subsequent part of the service. There are, so to speak, stages, as we often say, from glory to glory. The saints come out of their houses as in freedom from the influence of the world and sit down together. There is glory in that, but it is not the same glory as when we can take the ground of being risen with Christ and seated in the heavenlies in Christ. Why should we not do it? We are addressed as intelligent persons and we are dealing with the service, which is as much a service as that which

Moses inaugurated. Thus, when we take on the service, we should know the parts of it and how Scripture refers to it, and to use the right scriptures at any given time.

J.S.E. Does the reference to being raised remove the mind from the sense of suffering?

J.T. It does. The Lord is viewed as risen and, of course, you might say that the idea of suffering hardly fits; only we are dealing now, as we have said, with those that are addressed as intelligent persons. All these quotations from Scripture, therefore, as used in the service of God, ought to be used intelligently. Usually the service of God is dependent on someone taking part. It is not that we may not all, as it were, be in the Spirit, but there is the idea of someone taking part, because the service of God is largely a matter of speaking. Therefore if a brother is in power in the Spirit, his giving of thanks may lift us all up to a higher level. It is a question of what may be done by our taking part. There is great latitude, in a sense, but there is not to be mere words, but intelligence in what is being done, and why should there not be? The thought of priesthood involves intelligence and we are said to be priests of God and priests of Christ; the scripture says, "the priest's lips should keep knowledge" (Malachi 2:7), and a brother ought to bear that in mind, so that what he is saying is according to knowledge.

F.C.H. With regard to intelligence, how would you regard addressing the Lord as being above or on high, after the spiritual side is reached consequent on His coming in?

J.T. Well, I think if He is apprehended as having come in, it is happier to address Him as in our midst. But still if a brother addresses the Lord as above and as ascended and so on, then it would be a question of known doctrine, which is always right in its place. Mark would say, He is above, at the right hand of God, but Matthew does not say that. John would, of course, say both, but he entitled us to say that the Lord has come in,

and to say, "It is the Lord". John himself would say that and did say that, and if you are intelligent enough or spiritual enough to discern that the Lord is there, why not speak accordingly? "It is the Lord". The saints who are in the Spirit will recognise it too.

Ques. You have alluded to the words, "I am coming to you", as marking the whole of the dispensation; is His coming to us as referred to there, as conditions are pleasing to the Lord, of exactly the same character as what is spoken of in Matthew where it says, "where two or three are gathered together unto my name, there am I in the midst of them"?

J.T. Well, I think we ought to take that by itself. I would not regard that as exactly a scripture to treat of the saints as in assembly. I would take it as it is seen in Matthew; it would be evidently a time of stress and maybe in relation to a disciplinary matter. I would say generally it would be that and there is great need that the Lord should be with us in these matters, so that we should not have to take the ground of doing things twice, which is a very humbling thing.

E.C.B. Where does marital response come in, in relation to what you are speaking of?

J.T. Well, that is a matter of discernment too, and that is another word to keep before us. David used it in regard to Abigail, and it is a very good word; he said, "Blessed be thy discernment". In the service of God it is a question of discerning and not simply going on the ground of a theory.

A.G. In connection with the presence of the Lord amongst us, some have a difficulty as to ending our addresses to the Lord with the words, 'In Thy name', as seeming to imply distance. Would you help us as to that?

J.T. Well, the scripture that is before us tells us, in verse 17, "And everything, whatever ye may do in word or in deed, do all things in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God the Father by him". What can

anybody say about that? The name is there. It might be said, Well, that is ordinary; but still, there it is: "everything, whatever ye may do in word or in deed".

E.G. Would you say we are no more entitled to address the Lord Jesus either in prayer or thanksgiving and end up just with "Amen" than we are the Father? We must bring in His name because of what we are.

J.T. Well, quite.

L.E.S. Have you not stressed that the mediatorial position and service of the Lord is to be held by us at all times?

J.T. I would say that generally. There is no doubt that the term in the name has a military bearing and I am speaking of that here because of the idea of combat in this epistle. We have to recognise the enemy and what he might do at any time; but then the name has power in it. Thus we have the expression "No one can say, Lord Jesus, unless in the power of the Holy Spirit", 1 Corinthians 12:3. That would be a military thought too; there is power in the words. It is a great matter, in assembly position, that there should be power in all that is said and done, so that the enemy has no place.

P.L. Does the Name attach to His fame?

J.T. It does; quite so. The word "Name" in the Old Testament was used by itself. Jehovah, of course, was the One spoken of, but it was "the Name". One was said to have blasphemed "the Name" (see Leviticus 24:11). That is the name of God; and, of course, the name of God must enter into the name of Jesus, for it means "Jehovah the Saviour".

W.S.S. Does Ephesians 5:20 help in relation to what is before us, "giving thanks at all times for all things to him who is God and the Father in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ"?

J.T. Just so. Of course, we would have to make allowance in the assembly where the Lord's supper is only in view, because it is the Lord's supper; the name would then be used in that sense.

W.S.S. Do we ever reach a point when we would not say, In the name of our Lord Jesus Christ?

J.T. Well, that actual phrase would not be used if it were the Lord's supper, for we are then speaking to the Lord Himself, but the use of His Name is then right and in order. The time now will hardly suffice for us to go further with this point, although I am assured that it is most important.

P.H.H. Several have been asking about the matter of sufferings and in the minds of some the occasion of the Lord's supper is one at which there is liberty to mention the sufferings of atonement. I gather that that is not in your mind in relation to the Supper?

J.T. No; it is not in my mind. What is in mind is more centred in what is said by the Lord to Saul of Tarsus, "Why persecutest thou me?". Those are the Lord's own words, and He is not speaking there as in heaven; He has come down to where Saul was, and deals with him. It was a great matter in the Lord's mind, because He is taking on Saul. He is going to make him His chief servant, but He speaks first of what he was doing as persecuting. Of course, He is alluding to the fact that he was persecuting the saints, showing that the saints are bound up with Christ in that sense.

Eu.R. When it says "the Lord Jesus, in the night in which he was delivered up", would not that involve that He was in the midst of sufferings and treachery?

J.T. Just so. That is one of the first things we have, you might say, in regard of the Lord's supper.

P.H.H. So that it is more sufferings in connection with the testimonial position.

J.T. Quite so. That is a good word for it.

L.E.S. It is very much similar to the position of the three men in Daniel's day, and One like the Son of God being discerned as in their midst.

J.T. Very good. Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego are mentioned about thirteen times in the chapter, showing what a place they had with God at that time,

and how one "like the Son of God" was seen there with them.

Ques. The position of the assembly as viewed in Corinthians does not go beyond the suffering position down here in testimony, does it?

J.T. I would say that.

P.L. So that His presence assures solace in every church grief.

J.T. Quite so. All of what we are saying now is of the utmost importance in the sense of comfort. We do need comfort for the world is just turned upside down. Men are at their wits' end to know what to do, but the Lord would have us to be restful, and therefore He says, "I will not leave you comfortless: I will come to you". What we have been saying involves that the Lord is near. What does that mean? It is not simply that He is at our side; He is just near, and you can, as it were, call on Him. The Lord is near in the sense of help.

Ques. Would the word that Joseph says to his brethren in Genesis 45 be in your mind, "Behold, your eyes see, and the eyes of my brother Benjamin, that it is my mouth which speaks to you"? And then afterwards it says that "his brethren talked with him".

J.T. That would fit rightly.

Now, in view of the time at our disposal, we must proceed to what follows. In the first verse of chapter 3, we have the sequential idea: "If therefore ye have been raised with the Christ, seek the things which are above", the word heaven is not used there, it is above, "where the Christ is, sitting at the right hand of God: have your mind on the things that are above, not on the things that are on the earth; for ye have died, and your life is hid with the Christ in God". So that it is a question now of moving on; not exactly in the service of God, although that may come into it, but moving on in our souls, hence the thought of the word seek: "Seek the things which are above". In Colossians the tendency is to lead upwards. It is not a millennial thought; it is more than

the millennial thought in Colossians, it is an assembly thought that is in mind. Although we are still viewed as literally on earth the apostle wants to lift us up, and so he uses the word raised. The word "If therefore ye have been raised" refers to baptism; he is referring indeed to what the second chapter enlarges upon, and using it to lift us up, to make us heavenly minded, or as above.

H.A.H. Is the thought of above, in view of power in the service?

J.T. Well, it would be; but more dignity, I would say. It is in view of our being lifted on to heavenly ground. The word 'above', of course, is very striking. It is so forceful as disconnecting our minds from the earth, and that raises the question of the expanse, as we have already had it. The expanse is a very wide thought, reaching down to the earth, with the waters above the expanse and the waters under it. The position is that we are in the expanse, in that sense, and it is a question of how the operations can proceed unhindered.

W.C. Would the daughters of Zelophehad illustrate the idea of being heavenly minded and typify that element in the assembly that appreciates the inheritance?

J.T. The inheritance enters into what we are talking about, the Spirit of God being the earnest of it.

Ques. In rejecting the expression, 'the resurrection platform', have you in mind that true assembly relationships are in ascension, and that we should always have that as our objective?

J.T. Well, that is good. I would say that. The Lord went to the right hand of God, which is a definite matter, and He can be there whenever He wishes to be and operate from there. He does operate from there, in fact He has gone beyond all heavens, we are told, and that should be in our minds too. Therefore the Lord is in liberty, and we cannot limit the Lord; we cannot limit a divine Person. It is a question of what He pleases to do, because it is a question of God at all times.

J.S.E. Would "the things that are above" which we seek be connected with the treasures of wisdom and knowledge?

J.T. Well, they are morally above. That is, they are above what this world is going on with. The assembly's position is heaven, and the thought is to bring the saints, as forming it, into a spiritual state of things. The teaching of Colossians is to enable us to take heavenly ground, that is to take ground above what the world is going on with.

J.H.T. Would the expression, "three men going up to God" (1 Samuel 10:3), cover what you are saying? They had one purpose before them. They were heavenly minded.

J.T. Quite so. That links us on with our ministry meetings for it is a question of God.

Ques. Does the expression "your life is hid with the Christ in God" amplify what you have said?

J.T. Well, I think it is in keeping with the idea of Colossians, where it says, "in which are hid all the treasures of wisdom and of knowledge". It is the idea of a covering, I think; we are not letting the natural mind into it. It might be linked on with the headship of Christ in 1 Corinthians where we have the idea of a covering, but the word hid would mean that they are not exposed to the devil. That implies that the Spirit is here and that there is power to conceal things and to maintain the idea of mystery, which is a great matter as regards the assembly and this dispensation.

Ques. Would you say a word as to the assembly's place in relation to the expanse? Is the assembly's true place above the expanse?

J.T. He has "raised us up together, and has made us sit down together in the heavenlies in Christ Jesus". The word heavenlies is in Ephesians, of course, and it is a question really of what is meant, and whether that is to be regarded as in the expanse.

J.S.E. Does the word above in our chapter help in that connection?

J.T. Well, I think that is right. The word 'above' is in keeping with what we have often spoken of: "Jerusalem above, ... which is our mother". It is the moral elevation she is in. The word used in ordinary worldly affairs means that some people are high up and the like. In the things of God we have the same idea, only this involves our having the Spirit, and the position that Christ has literally. Christ has literally gone above, He is above all principality and power; He has gone beyond all the heavens. The thought of above is greatly intensified when we think of Christ personally. Well, then, the thing is for us to apply the idea of being above to ourselves, and then to the assembly's position, because her position is to be the nearest to Deity of all the families. Thus we get, for instance, "the Spirit and the bride say, Come", which shows how near the bride or the assembly is to divine Persons, or to the Deity; how near her place is.

J.S.E. You have referred to the invasion by the enemy; are we let into the secret in this chapter that there are things that are uncapturable on that line, things that remain intact?

J.T. I would say that. The primal thought of the assembly is that it is uncapturable. That is, "Hades' gates shall not prevail against it", Matthew 16:18. So it is that John's epistle would show in an abstract sense that as Christ is, so are we in this world, without going up. It shows the application of power in us, in an abstract sense.

Eu.R. Do the upper springs given to Achsah involve power in our souls enabling us to reach these higher levels?

J.T. Quite so. They are the upper and the nether springs. There may be a comparison with what we call the expanse in Genesis 1:7, because there the waters also are in two places. The upper springs would be the

Spirit viewed as in relation to heavenly things in Ephesians, but I suppose the nether would be Romans and perhaps Colossians too. It would be what the Spirit is, in operation down here, in view of our ascension and our part in the assembly.

Now to come on to the idea of the new man and the old man. These two thoughts are in the verses beginning with verse 5 down to the end of verse 11.

"Put to death therefore your members which are upon the earth, fornication, uncleanness, vile passions, evil lust, and unbridled desire, which is idolatry. On account of which things the wrath of God comes upon the sons of disobedience. In which ye also once walked when ye lived in these things. But now, put off, ye also, all these things, wrath, anger, malice, blasphemy, vile language out of your mouth. Do not lie to one another, having put off the old man with his deeds, and having put on the new, renewed into full knowledge according to the image of him that has created him; wherein there is not Greek and Jew, circumcision and uncircumcision, barbarian, Scythian, bondman, freeman; but Christ is everything, and in all". So that it is a question now of the new man. It is not so much the question of above, of heavenly places, but the new man; that is, another man replacing what is here. There is only one; one of the new and one of the old; and it is of great importance because we are dealing now with a world that is either Canaanitish or Egyptian. The Canaanitish side is that which might invade the truth of Christianity. The Egyptian refers to the world of the flesh. The idea of what is Egyptian, as entering into the old man, is to be noted. It shows what nature may be, what the earth may be or the world may be, in a general sense, as for instance, in Asia or in Africa, where neither Judaism nor Christianity has had any influence. It is just the naked thought of the world, of the flesh in man, without any amelioration. On the other hand, if we are dealing with what we may speak of now as Canaanitish things, it is important

to note that the "old man" enters into these also; there would be then an allusion to what Christianity has done, what Judaism has done too in a public sense, but especially Christianity. It is Christendom, the world as it is, but as affected by the truth of Christianity, yet the old man is in it, as much as in the Egyptian, and it is specially the truth of Colossians and Ephesians, indeed the truth generally, that delivers us from these features of the old man.

L.E.S. Would that be in Abraham's mind in Genesis 24 when he told his servant not to take a wife for his son of the daughters of the Canaanites?

J.T. Quite so. They would, I think, represent the old man, but when we come to the typical teaching, it is not in Genesis, but in Leviticus. The typical idea of the old and new man is in Leviticus, and Leviticus is meant for Christianity. It is meant for us, because "whatsoever things were written aforetime were written for our learning". It is for us to see whether we are dealing with Canaanitish things, that is to say, things now that they are affected by Christianity, or whether we are dealing with Egyptian things, which would just mean nature as it is without any trammels, without anything to control it. We have both things to deal with.

Ques. Would it be right to say that the first group of evil things are those which are indigenous to a fallen nature, and the second group are habits which might be acquired by us?

J.T. The Canaanitish side and the Egyptian side are very near to each other now, if we take the world as it is in Britain or in America. In America, specially, it is as much Egyptian as it is Canaanitish. In Britain it may be more Canaanitish, because of the influence of Christianity, but there is not much to say as to the actual features in either group. The worst things, I would say, are the things that are found in Asia, the terrible wickedness of Asia. There polygamy is unrestrained and all that goes with it, and the ancient things have been carried

down, you might say, from the time of the flood. Man unrestrained is there. Of course, that enables us to see what we were delivered out of, because Christianity delivers out of both, whether it be Canaanitish or Egyptian. It is a question of the gospel. Thus when we come to the 12th verse it says, "Put on therefore, as the elect of God, holy and beloved, bowels of compassion, kindness, lowliness, meekness, long-suffering; forbearing one another, and forgiving one another, if any should have a complaint against any; even as the Christ has forgiven you, so also do ye. And to all these add love, which is the bond of perfectness. And let the peace of Christ preside in your hearts, to which also ye have been called in one body, and be thankful". That is the new man applied fully. The word new in the previous passage, according to the footnote, means young or fresh. That is to say, what is fresh in the youth, and those who recognise the Spirit and walk in the Spirit, there is peculiar freshness in what God has thus wrought in young people. Of course, an old person is in it too, but the idea of youthfulness is to be noted, and it is very precious that it can be taken account of in Christianity, in the new man.

P.H.H. Do you think Elisha taking up the mantle of Elijah, that is the man who is above, and using the mantle, would illustrate these thoughts?

J.T. Very good. He discarded the other, you mean?

P.H.H. Yes, it says, "he took hold of his own garments and rent them ... And he took up the mantle of Elijah which fell from him", as if to convey that the mantle remained here.

J.T. Quite so. Hence the position in Elisha is carried on thus. It is, you might say, the new man. He has come down, in that sense, from above and all these qualities described in verses 12 to 15 belong to that realm.

P.L. So that the traits of the heavenly man are now to be maintained in unity in a corporate way amongst us?

J.T. Quite so; that is good, especially if we can get them in young people, young men and young women. How great a thing it is to get them, for they are very, very rare!

Eu.R. Is that what is involved in the expression, "Christ is everything, and in all"?

J.T. Just so. The word there refers to what He is to us, in the new man. If you speak to a young Christian about Christ, well, he might say, Christ is everything to me, and if it is shown that He is everything, and no other thought is in the mind, that is an immense thing. It is a glorious thing to get a young person to whom Christ is everything, and in all. So we have here in verse 10, "having put on the new, renewed into full knowledge according to the image of him that has created him"; (That, of course, would be Christ),. "wherein there is not Greek and Jew, circumcision and uncircumcision, barbarian, Scythian, bondman, freeman; but Christ is everything, and in all". Well, that must be in persons; that is to say these qualities of Christ, known down here, must be in persons.

W.H. Then the persons themselves are addressed, are they not, in verse 12, in the same language by which Christ was addressed, "the elect of God, holy and beloved"?

J.T. Just so. The sequential thought thus comes in that verse, "Put on therefore as the elect of God". The doctrine of the new man, or what we may call the abstract thought of it, is more in the previous paragraph, but from the twelfth verse down to the fifteenth verse we have the actual concrete thought that the apostle is aiming at. It is that these precious traits should be seen in the young and in all of us.

L.O.L. Does the Lord anticipate this new man in Luke 10 in relation to the man who went down from Jerusalem to Jericho? This man was stripped of his garment and left by the side of the road, but the Lord typically comes in and supplies him with everything he

needs on the line of compassion, long-suffering, and meekness.

J.T. Well, I would say that. There can be no doubt that the Lord had in mind Mary and Martha, especially that Mary had "chosen the good part", as it says in that chapter. All these features of the new man would indicate one who is chosen, corresponding to Christ, "the elect of God". It is a question of choice and what we are taking on, both as to garb and all else. It says of Mary, "the good part, the which shall not be taken from her".

Ques. Does the fact that full knowledge is the first feature of the new man mentioned here, bear on the epistle particularly, and link with the good part as seen in Mary? I was thinking of human learning and the necessity of setting aside philosophy and vain deceit and so on.

J.T. Quite so. The doctrine or abstract thought of it, as we were saying, is in that passage you quoted, "having put on the new, renewed into full knowledge", the word "putting on" here would be our profession, I would think; what we accept as truth in Christianity. But then the next paragraph, verses 12 - 15, gives the concrete thought. "Put on therefore", it is a sequence to what he has been saying. We are regarded as the elect of God, which is not in the previous passage, as far as I see, "Put on therefore, as the elect of God, holy and beloved, bowels of compassion", and so on. The putting on is not simply abstract, it is practical, it is concrete, so that one puts on these things, and learns to put them on. It may take years to learn to put them on fully, but you have that in your mind, for that is the divine idea. Then the elect of God, being applied to Christ Himself, is abstractly applied to us too, so that we are spoken of thus. The saints are the elect of God, everyone of us is elected and has that character in the mind of God.

P.L. Is it what is distinctive in incorruptibility in the presence of all that is so corrupted?

J.T. Quite so. What God has for Himself, in His own elect.

A.J.M. Would the boy Samuel illustrate this? It says, "Samuel ministered before Jehovah ... girded with a linen ephod. And his mother made him a little coat, and brought it to him from year to year", 1 Samuel 2:18, 19. Has that any bearing on the matter?

J.T. I think it has, because Jehovah made him a confidant as to His concern about the condition of the priesthood. It is a very remarkable thing that Jehovah should take on a young boy like that, for he was still very young, as a confidant to tell him about the old priest and especially his sons who were corrupt. The old man was there in those sons.

T. There are some among us who have some reservations regarding young ones being received into fellowship when only round about the age of twelve. Could you tell us anything about that?

J.T. I have no difficulty about young people coming into fellowship at that age. It is a question of where they are in their souls. I am always encouraged in the fact that the Lord was twelve when He said, "Wist ye not that I must be about my Father's business?", Luke 2:49. That is intended to be a model for us as to youth.

W.C. Do you think that is about the right age?

J.T. I think it is recognised as being used of the Lord Himself.

Ques. Would we have a concrete example of "the new man" in the little maid in the household of Naaman? Even in captivity she refused to be held back.

J.T. Well, Joseph is a very good example of a young man, an incorruptible young man. He would not hearken to the seductive person that was seeking to corrupt him.

L.H. Would verses 12 to 17 of our chapter represent what is substantial in the saints in line with what was suggested at the beginning?

J.T. That is right. The new man is one idea involving all these qualities.

Ques. Referring to the expression "the image of him that has created him", is it that the Lord puts His own impress on the saints?

J.T. It is a remarkable thing that the creative thought is here. As Adam was created, so here it is a creation, and that brings us into a very important line of thought.

A.G. Would "bowels of compassion" refer to what is inward and represent a normal spiritual function, valuable, in days of increasing difficulty, amongst the saints?

J.T. Quite so. It is needed just now, there is so much illness and suffering of every kind. Hence the need for putting on what we get in verse 14, "to all these add love, which is the bond of perfectness". If we want to get the thing perfectly, love is the bond of it.

C.O.B. Is, "the peace of Christ" the ultimate, as coming after love?

J.T. Quite. It is an additional thought, I would say. "And let the peace of Christ preside in your hearts". It is remarkable that it has its full place in the heart, "the peace of Christ preside in your hearts, to which also ye have been called in one body, and be thankful". The full thought of the assembly is in mind, as to the presiding power of the peace of Christ being there.

Rem. There does not seem to be any limit to the idea of forgiving one another.

J.T. Quite so. Because is according to the measure of Christ.

SPIRITUAL FORMATION FOR ASSEMBLY SERVICE (6)

Colossians 3:18 - 25; Colossians 4:1 - 18

J.T. The personal side, a feature of Christianity, is peculiarly in mind in these sections of this epistle. There can be no doubt that these meetings that we have had are intended to strengthen the personal side, especially as to those who, in their formation, are calculated to influence the position of the testimony and the saints in it. The Lord would put forward such as are faithful and, in their faithfulness, are influential for good. This reaches down, not to the full thought of the family, as we get it in Ephesians, but to certain relationships, such as wives and husbands and children. John has liberty to speak of certain persons in a dignified way, on account of their status as amongst the saints. Thus he speaks of "the elect lady and her children" (2 John 1), and Luke also refers to Theophilus on the same principle. There can be no doubt that these meetings, such as we are having now, and also what are called week-end fellowship meetings, are intended to promote personal acquaintance and characteristics and influence, so as to bind the position. In taking up Paul, it is pretty clear that the Lord intended to make him specially distinguished on the personal line as one to be trusted. Paul therefore takes on that in the way he speaks here of certain ones in this closing chapter, such as Tychicus, of whom he says that he is "the beloved brother and faithful minister and fellow-bondman in the Lord". He evidently was linked up personally with Paul whom, he says, "I have sent to you for this very purpose, that he might know your state, and that he might encourage your hearts". Then again, Onesimus is linked on similarly and, particularly, Epaphras who is spoken of as combating and as one of the Colossians. All this tends to promote the idea of a community, as it were, in us all and thus promotes confidence.

P.L. Are these a little like the golden taches of the tabernacle?

J.T. Just so, for the tabernacle is in view here. The whole position is in mind that it might be kept, as it were, in a tidy way, as having a finished character. Like the hem of the garment of the high priest, it is a finished idea.

P.L. "This one and that one was born in her; and the Most High himself shall establish her", Psalm 87:5.

E.G. "Rejoicing and seeing your order". Would that be connected with the taches?

J.T. Just so. "And the firmness of your faith in Christ". He puts that in early in the letter, in view of what he was about to open up for them; that is, the idea of the service of God. It is important that the order in which they did things should be kept in the front.

W.H. Is there anything very important in the fact that Paul desired the saints at Colosse and elsewhere to be constantly maintained in touch with what he was doing and ministering?

J.T. I thought of that, in mentioning this side of the subject. So we have the expression, "I Paul", and also the way he would inform them of himself, as he says, "Tychicus ... will make known to you all that concerns me". The leading servants are of prime importance in heaven, and although what is going on there is not visible to us, it is to be understood through our communion. He speaks in Romans of certain things by "the love of the Spirit", which is a real thing and enters into what we are saying. It is not only the love of the Father and the Son, but the love of the Spirit, and that would bear on what we are saying as to Paul. He enlarges on the same thing in Romans, as taking up the basic position, but here in Colossians it is the thought of finishing and binding up things, so that they should not hang loosely or give place to the devil. For instance, if the relations of a wife with her husband were estranged, the devil would easily get a footing, and talk would be spread abroad to disintegrate the whole position. We must therefore not

give place to the devil, as is done if things are held loosely by us. So it says, "Wives, be subject to your husbands" (the word "own", apparently, is not there as it is elsewhere), "be subject to your husbands (or to husbands), as is fitting in the Lord". The stress would be on wives and husbands; for them it says, "Husbands, love your wives, and be not bitter against them". That an apostle should condescend to such suggestions and admonitions is worthy of note.

F.C.H. Does the expression "one another", just preceding this, lay the basis for these specific things?

J.T. Quite so. When you have references to wives and husbands, then the possibility of bitterness against the wives is remarkable. It would bear on what we have remarked, from time to time, as to the attack and how Satan may attack us through the relations between husbands and wives.

J.S.E. Why is the weaker put first? Does it show us how we can, in our several relationships, be on the line of prevention of further invasion?

J.T. Yes. 'Further invasion' is an expression that may well be used, because the expanse is wide and varied and affords conditions for the devil. The expanse in Genesis 1 is not said to be good, by the Creator, because it affords so much scope for the enemy for invasions and for attacks. At the same time it is never given up and it is used. The idea of the heavens, I suppose, would come down to the lowest point, extending to the earth itself. The expanse was evidently added after the primal creation, as if God would use it in His ways for His operations, and yet it was not included in what He designed originally. I mean to say, He does not say that it is good, although it affords these things that we are speaking of and we have to keep it in mind.

L.O.L. In Psalm 36 we have "Jehovah, thy loving-kindness is in the heavens, and thy faithfulness reacheth unto the clouds. Thy righteousness is like the high mountains; thy judgments are a great deep: thou,

Jehovah, preservest man and beast. How precious is thy loving-kindness, O God! So the sons of men take refuge under the shadow bf thy wings". Does that refer to the heavens and what is available in them?

J.T. Yes. It shows the extent of the expanse and how varied are the things that may be found in it. But then God is in it for it is His creation. In fact, it is among the many things that are called good in general, but it is not specifically called good, and therefore it seems that the enemy has a peculiar way of attacking it and that God has allowed that.

P.H.H. Would the reference to the anointing in Psalm 133 be a kind of counterpart of that; the brethren dwelling together in unity being like the precious ointment, descending finally to the skirts of Aaron's garments? Would that be a preservative against the inroads in the expanse?

J.T. I would think that. There is variety of space, because the word expanse means that it is a large matter, and evidently Satan took advantage of it, gradually getting into the position of government.

A.N.W. Can your remarks, in that connection, be extended to the relationship of children to their parents, as well as to wives and husbands?

J.T. Well, we have "Wives be subject to your husbands, as is fitting in the Lord". That is to say, it is to be just what is fitting or suitable to a woman in the relation of a wife. It is clear that polygamy is not in mind in these letters; it is the primal thought of God in the relation of man and woman, that is, as husband and wife. So it goes on, "Husbands, love your wives, and be not bitter against them". Why that should be added is a matter for consideration. "Be not bitter against them". Why should there be alienation to that extent? We can see that alienation might happen, and be even permanent, where the bitterness of a husband towards a wife is in any way allowed.

P.L. If the first tie is weakened between husband and wife, is the next tie, between children and parents, weakened?

J.T. That would be the result, I suppose. If relations become dislocated the condition of the house would be somewhat marred. But then it says, "Husbands, love your wives and be not bitter against them". And then, "Children, obey your parents in all things". Whatever there may be as to the children, the word "obey" is clearly imperative, "for this is well-pleasing in the Lord". Then, "Fathers, do not vex your children", showing that we are on somewhat lower ground than in Ephesians, although on higher ground than in Romans. No reference is made to the family in Romans, properly; whereas it is here, and also in Ephesians. "Do not vex your children, to the end that they be not disheartened". How the apostolic mind, moved by love, extends down even to the feelings of a young child in a family and the possibility of such a one being disheartened by the attitude of his father!

A.H.G. Why is there no reference to the family in Romans, and why is it introduced here and in Ephesians?

J.T. I think it is because Romans was not intended to go the full length of formation according to Christ. It is just to deal with the fundamentals of Christianity, making a basis for the gospel, although, as we know, it leads on to the assembly.

P.L. Is every element here, down to bondmen as well as the children, mobilised, so to speak, to resist the invasion?

J.T. That is the idea, I would say, because we are where an invasion is possible at any time. Now, of course, it is greatly accentuated in the added modern thought of associations and the lawless combinations of men. Many of these are lawless and utterly unfair, because there is a robbing of men's rights, as in this country. The principle of the Magna Carta involving liberty is just thrown to

the winds by certain combinations of men. All these tend to give the enemy a place, and invade even the Lord's people. Some of the Lord's people have given way to these combinations of men, for supposed personal advantage.

E.A.E. Why are the wives addressed before the husbands, the children before the parents, and the bondmen before the masters?

J.T. I think it is that Satan finds his point of attack in the weaker elements. The strong elements, therefore, ought to see to that, and not afford opportunity for the attack. Thus it is for the husband to love the wife, who is the weaker, and the father not to provoke the children, who are weaker than the father, because if the children are disheartened, they are exposed to the devil.

Ques. Is it interesting that Paul in his first movement into Europe at Philippi secures these right conditions in the jailor's house? It says he "rejoiced with all his house, having believed in God", Acts 16:34. It is as though you have the firstfruits of this great thought there.

J.T. It is remarkable that a jail should be the place of the disclosure of divine consideration for men, and that in the position there should be the thought of the house. It is remarkable that the house, where the wife and children reside, should be spoken of in the jail. So the word is, "Believe on the Lord Jesus and thou shalt be saved, thou and thy house". The use of the pronouns thou and thy would arouse the family idea in the jailor, who is the person in question. The facts show that he was a hard man, unduly hard as a jailor; but then he had a house, and how would the hardness of the jailor comport with the affections that belonged to his house? The great thought was that the gospel could meet that situation, and so what he saw there in the jail would bring out what Colossians promotes. It says, "Paul and Silas, in praying, were praising God with singing". They were creating an attractive condition so that the gospel was commended in the jail, but commended in

relation to the house, for the jailor's house would be taken care of in the gospel.

W.S.S. Is it your thought that all these relationships are to be so held that the truth opened up to us in Colossians finds expression in persons who are found in these relationships?

J.T. That is just the thought and links with what we had this morning. It is a question of the new man, which bears on woman as well as man, and on children too. It is what is new and fresh, and it is to work out in these relations. Hence the apostle is led to move from the passages we had this morning to verse 18, which deals with wives and husbands, children and fathers, and then servants. It is in view of all these relations being available for the promotion of the new man. The new man in the wife, and the new man in the husband, and the new man in the children and in the fathers, and then the new man in the bondmen. That the idea of the new man should be in the bondmen, of course, should certainly bear on, what we have been remarking as to the lawless combinations of men. Trade unionism is utterly foreign to the idea of the new man.

A.Mh. Would Boaz illustrate this? "And behold, Boaz came from Bethlehem; and he said to the reapers, Jehovah be with you! And they said to him, Jehovah bless thee!". Would that be on the level of this exhortation?

J.T. Very good. It shows the happy relations existing between his reapers and himself, and that Ruth should be brought into these circumstances. It is all to promote the idea of the new man, and the new man is a creation. It is, as it were, God doing things over again, but in men; under the heading of the word "man".

Ques. You have spoken of trade unionism. Would verses 23 and 24 be over against the so-called advantages? "Whatsoever ye do, labour at it heartily, as doing it to the Lord, and not to men; knowing that of the Lord ye shall receive the recompense of the inheritance". Is

that not better than anything that could be gained, or thought to be gained, by the associations of men, and would it not be an incentive to stand aside?

J.T. Quite so. "Knowing that of the Lord ye shall receive the recompense of the inheritance; ye serve the Lord Christ". The inheritance is on a higher level, of course, for the Spirit is the earnest of it.

Ques. I wondered whether it linked on with what you were saying as to the truth that is opened up in Colossians; whether the inheritance is in view and ability to go into it promoted?

J.T. Just so. It is a question of who is to go into it; that is to say, it is the idea of the new man.

Ques. Had not Paul given a right lead in the matter of masters and servants when he sent Onesimus back to his master, Philemon, in righteousness?

J.T. It is remarkable that he comes in here, and he is included in those that are spoken of favourably. It says, "Onesimus, the faithful and beloved brother, who is one of you". He was one of the Colossians but he was a convert of Paul's, and Paul's treatment of him is a guide for us as to persons in those circumstances. It shows how Christianity lifts us up from any spirit of slavery which might invade the family and the home. Circumstances of slavery might invade the family, not only in the wife, but in the servants, and slavery is not suitable for Christianity. Therefore the reference to Onesimus would lift Onesimus from the position of a slave into that of a "brother beloved", which is an exalted thought.

E.B. When the Lord Jesus came down from the mount, the enemy brought forward a child completely under his power, as much as to nullify, if he could, what had marked the scene on the mountain. Is it not often the case that domestic circumstances tend to mar or detract from what we may have enjoyed in a spiritual sense?

J.T. Very good. No doubt the brethren are all conversant with the incident. Matthew records it as a case of lunacy in this child. The Lord, in a remarkable way, avoids hastening the matter of the recovery of the child and He delays to ask the father about him and how the thing happened and so on. It would look, from the facts, as if the father was a real father, and he says to the Lord, "If thou couldst do anything ... help us". But then the Lord does not hasten to meet the situation. He saw the crowd coming, running up, but the crowd will not help the family, nor the condition of lunacy in the family, and so the Lord proceeds to cure the child and He commands the demon to go out of him. Thus the Lord would meet these family conditions. There is nothing said about the mother and what she may have thought of it. It is the father only, but, as we have said, it would seem as if he were a real father, and he besought the Lord for his child. The disciples could not help and that is another matter to be thought of. The father tells the Lord that he brought his son to the disciples and they could not help, and the Lord attributes the want of faith to everybody. It was not only the crowd but the disciples too, but then He meets the situation Himself. We can thus count on the Lord to come in in all these circumstances. It is a question of prayer, so that the man says, "If thou couldst do anything ... help us". The Lord says to him, "The 'if thou couldst' is 'if thou couldst believe'", that is to say, it brings in the thought of faith in such circumstances.

Ques. Would we have a contrast in Deborah? The conditions were rather unsettled, but the household conditions there were right. She is spoken of as "the wife of Lapidoth". The blessing then, so to speak, went right through the tribes.

J.T. Yes. She did not use her office, as we may call it, of a prophetess to exalt herself; she retained her place as a wife. The name Lapidoth, I suppose, would show that light was there. This epistle to Colossians is to give

light both to husbands and wives. Deborah behaved well, both in regard of her husband and also in regard of Barak, although she is not commended in Hebrews 11 amongst the persons who had faith, as Barak is.

A.S. Why does the apostle refer to the Lord so much in this part of the epistle: it is more "Christ" in the earlier part?

J.T. Well, no doubt it is a question of the authority of the Lord that enters into this hortatory part. So we have, as you say, the Lord used more frequently than Christ. It is just to bring out, I suppose, the authority that was needed. When it becomes a possibility of bitterness in the husband or insubjection in the wife, then we have to bring the Lord in.

H.F.N. Might we have some help in regard of these distinctive servants such as Tychicus, Onesimus and Epaphras?

J.T. Leading up to those, we already alluded to bondmen or slaves. Then we have masters, in the beginning of chapter 4, "Masters, give to bondmen what is just and fair", which is a very important matter. Although there are fewer masters now and fewer servants than there used to be, yet the idea of fairness comes into these relations. "Give to bondmen what is just and fair, knowing that, ye also have a Master in the heavens". That brings up the position of the Lord as our Master, as it is said. "I therefore, the Lord and the Teacher", John 13:14. We have to look to Him for the fairness that is suitable between master and bondmen or servant. The Lord is the model in all these cases; but Paul helps us in what he teaches, and it is very striking how he can descend to the smallest things, family relationships and bondmen and so forth.

Ques. Is it significant that he brings in the thought of government? "For he that does a wrong shall receive the wrong he has done, and there is no respect of persons". Does it not bear particularly on this situation?

J.T. Just so. "No respect of persons", for God is God and man is man, and we have to do with the Lord Christ. Then the thought of prayer is the next important matter. "Persevere in prayer, watching in it with thanksgiving; praying at the same time for us also, that God may open to us a door of the word to speak the mystery of Christ". So that it is not only what prayers may be, or should be, for the servants, but the truth that they actually minister and whether they go in for the full thought, that is to say, the mystery. He says, "Persevere in prayer, watching in it with thanksgiving; praying at the same time for us also, that God may open to us a door of the word to speak the mystery of Christ, on account of which also I am bound, to the end that I may make it manifest as I ought to speak". We have already noted that his enemy spoke of the contemptibleness of his speech, but then he was concerned that he should speak as he ought to speak. It is not simply his power of speaking as to what men might think of it, but "as I ought to speak", he says; that is to say, what the subject required.

P.H.H. Is the idea that even in the speaking of one like Paul, the enemy might get no advantage, so that the ministry is not to be beclouded or the level of it lowered?

J.T. It is how he ought to speak. No doubt he would assume that he would know himself how he ought to speak, but it is thrown out in this general way and it is for each of us. It raises the question as to whether we are given over to the thought of the mystery in our ministry. How many of us are? Mr. Stoney, as far as I have heard of him, gave himself, in a great measure, over to the truth of the mystery; so that it should be known. But the question is whether that subject by itself is much treated of now; "the mystery of Christ".

P.H.H. Do you mean you think it should be?

J.T. I think it should be, because we can never really arrive at the full thought except in the sense of the mystery.

W.S.S. Should it not be the background of all speaking; whether ministry among the saints or the ministry of the glad tidings?

J.T. Well, it says here that they were to persevere, but he adds as to himself, "praying at the same time for us also". One is thankful that one does not feel the need of asking the brethren to pray, because the volume of prayer that goes up for any one who is in trouble is wonderful. It is due to the brethren that it should be said that the volume of prayer is wonderful and it is answered, too, for the answers have come. But why should Paul have to ask for it? That is something to think of. In certain circumstances a brother may be neglected. Why should it be? Did Paul's prison condition cause indifference or weakness in the saints as to him? It is well worth inquiring why he asked so often for prayer. He does in Ephesians, and here, and elsewhere. He stresses the thought here of persevering in prayer and that it should be with watching and thanksgiving, but he adds, "praying at the same time for us also". But then, why? Because, he says, "that God may open to us a door of the word to speak the mystery of Christ". He enjoins on Timotheus to preach the word, in his second letter to him, and he says here "that God may open to us a door of the word to speak the mystery of Christ, on account of which also I am bound, to the end that I may make it manifest as I ought to speak".

A.Mh. Do you think that this exhortation to persevere in prayer, following the exhortation in the latter part of chapter 3 and chapter 4, might be carried forward into our homes so that prayers for the divine interests and the Lord's servants would have a great place with us?

J.T. I am glad you mention that because of what we have often referred to lately; that is, the prayers for the gospel in the households of the brethren, and how the custom is teaching the children. They are being brought up with the thought that there should be prayer

and if they have households, in time they will have prayer in them. Prayer for the gospel on the Lord's day, I think, is of very great importance, because it elevates the character of the preaching and leads to the thought of the truth of the assembly, and the young people coming into the assembly, involving the mystery. So I think it links on with what we are saying. Paul is concerned that they should pray in regard of the mystery that a door should be opened to him. He says, "that God may open to us a door of the word", which is a remarkable form of expression, "a door of the word to speak the mystery of Christ, on account of which also I am bound, to the end that I may make it manifest as I ought to speak". It is all in view of the preachers having a higher level of ministry where not many unconverted people are present, but where the children of the saints are sure to be. The children should thus be brought up to understand this, and to acquire the habit of prayer for the gospel, for the testimony; not only for ordinary circumstances, but for the testimony.

G.H.M. You emphasise very much this prayer before the gospel. Would it not be an advantage before a reading meeting or other meetings?

J.T. Well, I am only speaking of what is. As far as I know, the households of the brethren generally are employed in prayer immediately before the gospel on Lord's day evenings, and I believe it is pleasing to the Lord, pleasing to heaven. The question now is whether we rise to the full level of the testimony, because here it is a question, not of the gospel, but of the mystery. The brethren, and even the little ones, may bring the thought in, because if there are young ones who are in the family and they are actually in fellowship (or even if they are not, if they are known to be Christians) they should be made accustomed to prayer for the testimony.

Ques. Is it not striking that in the opening of Acts 21, where Paul departed, it says, "all of them accompanying us, with wives and children"? Is that

not a beautiful and touching expression of the thought of the households in relation to Paul? They all went down to the ship.

J.T. That is a very touching passage, showing how the young ones are brought into the thing. In fact we have already had it, how the children would make inquiry why the twelve stones taken out of the Jordan were set up in Canaan. They were supposed to be in Canaan, and the children in principle ought to be in Canaan and have understanding and be able to inquire as to the twelve stones, which would mean the unity of the brethren. Why is it needed that the brethren should be united? Children should be brought up in the thought that the brethren should be united.

Rem. At the entering of the testimony into Europe, it says, "we went outside the gate by the river, where it was the custom for prayer to be", Acts 16:13.

J.T. That has often been commented upon, and very profitably too. It was a question of Europe, and God pointing westwards, but pointing to the fact that Europe was in His mind and that it was to be the sphere of the truth as to the assembly. The governmental condition in Asia does not afford conditions really for the truth of the mystery, for the truth of the assembly.

A.H.G. You spoke of the attack by way of speaking. Would the counteracting influence be in this speaking?

J.T. Quite so. I think that is right.

L.E.S. Could we have a word on the end?

J.T. It is only in a cursory way we can refer to it. We have spoken of Onesimus; then we have Aristarchus who is said to be a fellow-captive, and then Mark, Barnabas' cousin, is spoken of. It says of him, "concerning whom ye have received orders (if he come to you, receive him)". It would look as if there was a doubt about Mark, and the apostle is taking account of that. Then he says, "These are the only fellow-workers for the kingdom of God who have been a consolation to me". It shows that he was thinking of himself and the need of

consolation in his fellow-servants, which is perhaps not always thought of. Then Epaphras has a peculiar place. We have already alluded to him in the whole epistle, as a man intended to dominate the position because of what he was, and how he was concerned about the Colossians. Now he is combating for them as it says, "salutes you, always combating earnestly for you in prayers, to the end that ye may stand perfect and complete in all the will of God". That is a very fine phrase, "perfect and complete in all the will of God". It is not simply in the mystery, or in the gospel, but in "all the will of God" and Satan was against that.

C.C. Would that involve the will of God according to Ephesians 1, "the good pleasure of his will", "the mystery of his will", and "the counsel of his own will"?

J.T. Quite so. It is a strong reference to the thought of "the will of God".

Ques. What would be the difference between Paul's reference to Epaphras in chapter 1 verse 7, "faithful minister of Christ for you", and in this chapter, "the bondman of Christ Jesus"?

J.T. Well, the word "bondman" is striking here, and is just in keeping with what we are saying; he is a fellow-bondman. We hardly know, in our time, what bondmanship is in the sense in which it is spoken of here, for Paul himself was a prisoner, a bondman. The book of Revelation is in that setting, which is also important. The Lord received it from God and it was evidently late in the history of the testimony that He received it. Then He sent and signified it by His bondman John, "who testified the word of God, and the testimony of Jesus Christ, all things that he saw". So that the idea of bondmanship came in then, and it is, perhaps, little known now, although there must be something to correspond with it in what some may be suffering in view of the testimony.

Then reference is made to a brother called Nymphas, "and the assembly which is in his house", which is

another thing not to pass by. Then it goes on, "And when the letter" (I would take that to be this letter), "has been read among you, cause that it be read also in the assembly of Laodiceans". That shows that Laodicea was still intact, but it shows also that letters to assemblies may be interchanged, but at the same time the letter should be intact. The letter should be just what it was as written to Colosse, or as written to Laodicea, because there were two letters. He says, "When the letter has been read among you, cause that it be read also in the assembly of Laodiceans, and that ye also read that from Laodicea", as if there was interchange between the local assemblies, because they were near to each other; they were adjacent to each other, but yet they were not viewed as one assembly. There has been a need in late years to enlarge assemblies, adding gatherings that are adjacent as recognising that they really belong to the local position and should rightly move together in local government and administration. But then we have here an indication, I think, that ought to be in mind, that we must not extend thus too far. The question is whether the position is local. The local position should never be set aside; it begins in Corinth and it runs through. So here, the local position of Colosse is not interfered with by the local position of Laodicea. Colosse was not one of the assemblies that is mentioned in the book of Revelation, yet Laodicea is, and therefore it has a distinct place as a local assembly.

Eu.R. Would the interchange of letters tend to the spiritual compactness of the universal situation so that the enemy is kept out?

J.T. Just so. The word compactness is good and it enters into this epistle.

Then there is the word to Archippus; "Take heed to the ministry which thou hast received in the Lord, to the end that thou fulfil it". That is, a brother may not be fulfilling his ministry (which may have a voice to some of us), for there may be a retirement to an easy

position, to a watering-place, or the like. We are to be alive as to the service that may be committed to us, and to see that we fulfil it, because Paul uses the word "fulfil". It was given to him "to complete the word of God"; it is the idea of completing a ministry. If the Lord has given us something to do, let us see that the thing is done, and not simply to take it easy because we are old, but to see that the thing is done. Carry on when you can and as long as you can.

A.Mh. Would you say that his ministry would not be only local but would go outside what is local? "Take heed to the ministry which thou hast received".

J.T. Whatever it was, he ought to know what he received from the Lord, and to see that it was fulfilled. I believe that is the point and it is a feature in this epistle. Paul says that he completed the word of God. He did not leave it open; the thing was finished. We have already alluded to the hem of the garment in Psalm 133, which I believe conveys the idea of a finished condition.

THE SETTING OF THE LORD'S SUPPER

1 Corinthians 11:1 - 3; Psalm 17 - 34

J.T. It is thought well to call attention to the verses relating to headship at the beginning of the chapter, with a view to speaking of the Lord's supper. The local position is specially in mind in the epistle, although the universal thought is in mind too in the verse "If any one think to be contentious, we have no such custom, nor the assemblies of God". It implies that contention is likely to occur and to hinder the understanding of the truth. So it opens with "the assembly of God which is in Corinth", and then certain things are spoken of in an abstract way. The abstract thought should be in mind, in view of the concrete truth set out, specially as to the Lord's supper. Clearly the local position is stressed, and then all that goes with the local position from the divine side in an abstract way, as if everything was there from the divine side, and then the hortatory part begins in verse 10. It is as if the apostle were specially concerned to deal with local conditions, with what might appear among them to cause obstruction to the truth. So that the abstract thought is in mind, beginning at verse 4, "I thank my God always about you, in respect of the grace of God given to you in Christ Jesus; that in everything ye have been enriched in him, in all word of doctrine, and all knowledge, (according as the testimony of the Christ has been confirmed in you,) so that ye come short in no gift, awaiting the revelation of our Lord Jesus Christ; who shall also confirm you to the end, unimpeachable in the day of our Lord Jesus Christ. God is faithful, by whom ye have been called into the fellowship of his Son Jesus Christ our Lord". We are reminded, at the outset, that everything is there from the divine side in view of what might cause obstruction that might cause darkness. So that everything should be clear in relation to the great subjects to be treated of, specially the Lord's supper.

Ques. Is there any distinguishing thought between the expressions, the Lord's supper, and the breaking of bread?

J.T. As the words indicate, the Lord's supper is a term that covers the whole institution, the whole matter of the bread and the cup. The Lord evidently intended that there should be a designation covering the whole institution of the Lord's supper. It would be foreseen that it would occasion much controversy, which it has, and the Lord has been pleased to give a term to cover it. It is seen in verse 20 of chapter 11, "the Lord's supper". That is the formal thought of the Spirit of God which evidently should cover the matter from the outset to the end. As in Judaism the Passover had a distinguishing feature, so the Lord's supper has a distinguishing feature in regard to the present dispensation.

Ques. Were you going to say something more as to headship as making way for this section dealing with the Lord's supper?

J.T. It was needful that if any directions were given in regard of this great subject of headship they should be observed and not be treated lightly. Paul makes a point of the fact that they kept his directions, and then he goes on as to headship, "But I wish you to know that the Christ is the head of every man, but woman's head is the man, and the Christ's head God". Clearly, if this important matter is to be understood, we have to discard contention. The Scriptures and the truth generally, are not to be understood through contention, but through subjection.

W.H. So would the feature of headship be the setting aside of all contention?

J.T. That is what I thought. How can God be Head except as we recognise that we are to be subject? How can we expect to reach the truth if we begin with the idea of contention? Some of us are very prone to be contentious and therefore the apostle says, "If any one think to be contentious, we have no such custom, nor

the assemblies of God". It does not say the assembly, but the assemblies; meaning that they were all set up on the principle of order. That is from the divine side, and order requires subjection, otherwise we may think as we wish, each having his own thoughts.

P.L. It is the Teacher and His disciples, in Mark's gospel, as we approach the Lord's supper, Mark 14:14.

J.T. Quite so. As the subject is approached in the three synoptic gospels the twelve are always in mind, meaning the administrative company. Luke says the Lord "placed himself at table, and the twelve apostles with him"; meaning that He had with Him enough to set out what was in mind in the number, and that there would be enough to deal with any attempt to overthrow it. I believe the twelve were in mind in the sense that there would be enough to deal with any attack on the truth. So that it is said in the second chapter of the Acts, "they continued stedfastly in the apostles' doctrine and fellowship, and in breaking of bread, and in prayers". There would be enough in those persons to overthrow any attempt at opposition.

J.S.E. Is that why there, is peculiar emphasis in Luke on the apostles?

J.T. I think so. Although Luke is marked by grace, yet he is also marked by authority.

Ques. Is it instructive that headship was first set aside by craftiness?

J.T. You mean the devil was crafty in setting aside Adam's authority over Eve.

G.C.S. Does Rebecca covering herself suggest the recognition of headship?

J.T. I would say that. Isaac is concerned about the camels first, for it says, "he lifted up his eyes and saw, and behold, camels were coming", Genesis 24:63. That would show that there was the means of carrying. Then she inquired about the man that is walking in the fields and the servant said, "That is my master". Abraham

is not said to be master there, but Isaac, meaning that the authority of Christ is there.

R.B. Do we see that in Abigail in the number of times she called David Lord?

J.T. Very good. David said to her, "Blessed be thy discernment", which is a great matter in regard to this point of headship. Then too, when David proposed marriage to her, the feminine thought, involving subjection, is stressed in the persons whom she took. Now the scripture continues, "Every man praying or prophesying, having anything on his head, puts his head to shame. But every woman praying or prophesying with her head uncovered puts her own head to shame; for it is one and the same as a shaved woman. For if a woman be not covered, let her hair also be cut off. But if it be shameful to a woman to have her hair cut off or to be shaved, let her be covered". Then it goes on further, in verse 10, "Therefore ought the woman to have authority on her head, on account of the angels". That is to say, the token of the authority under which she stands, shows that the unseen world, the angels above, are concerned about this matter, and certainly, if they are, all the sisters ought to be concerned about it too. As we read in the Scriptures, the angels have had to say to women as well as to men. Certainly the one that came to Manoah's wife reminds us of subjection in her. He did not come to her husband; he came to her. The husband had to say to him, also, but he hardly shines in what he says to the angel. The angels are thus to be held in regard, for we are told in Hebrews, "Are they not all ministering spirits, sent out for service on account of those who shall inherit salvation?". This matter of salvation includes the idea of headship.

P.H.H. So the thought of subjection is vital and essential to true assembly ground and any service in an assembly setting.

J.T. Hence, in verse 17, Paul immediately refers to the Lord's supper, but says that what was being done

at Corinth had not the character of the Lord's supper; whereas in verse 23 we are told what the Lord's supper is. "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". That expression "after having supped" implies a meal, but the Lord's supper is not an ordinary meal; it is a memorial. Paul says he could not praise them in this; "For each one in eating takes his own supper before others, and one is hungry and another drinks to excess". Therefore he says, "Have ye not then houses for eating and drinking? or do ye despise the assembly of God, and put to shame them who have not? What shall I say to you? shall I praise you? In this point I do not praise". He is not ready to commend what they are doing; indeed he condemns it.

A.M. Is there any suggestion in the title being changed? He says, "I received from the Lord that which I also delivered to you, that the Lord Jesus, in the night in which he was delivered up, took bread".

J.T. I think the title 'Lord Jesus' is an affectionate allusion to the Lord. It is found in other settings and usually conveys affection and regard for the Lord.

A.M. Would the title 'the Lord' suggest that what he had received was on the line of authority, whereas whenever one touches the thought of the Supper, affections come into play as suggested in the title, 'Lord Jesus'.

J.T. So we have the word, "No one can say, Lord Jesus, unless in the power of the Holy Spirit", 1 Corinthians 12:3. It is as if the Holy Spirit was needed to bring in the affection and respect that are due to the Lord in His Supper, for it is a question of His Supper.

Ques. Does this feature of headship become more essential on account of the character of the day in which we are? Is the light and recognition of headship an

element that we would preserve especially in view of our service together?

J.T. Quite so. What is current generally is just a travesty of the Lord's supper; hence, in view of the near coming of the Lord, as we all believe, it is necessary that the facts of His Supper should be understood, and that it should continue in its celebration to the very moment of His coming. There is hardly any feature of the Scriptures that has been more stressed of recent times than the Lord's supper, and the Lord has helped the brethren in it too.

Rem. Would you say more as to the memorial that you have spoken of.

J.T. It is not an ordinary meal, and that brings up the question of our houses. Paul says, "Have ye not then houses for eating and drinking?". There may be a deficiency of houses, but certainly the thought of the house is to be retained. It is not simply the dwelling-place, but the house as a family, as if the household of a believer is a place in which divine order should be set out and family feelings prevail. There should thus be a readiness when we come together, to partake of the Lord's supper, for we are equal to the order that belongs to it as well as to our houses.

W.H. Would the thought of the Supper suggest that the family in that sense would be free and able to take part in it restfully, the responsibilities of the day being over?

J.T. I would say that. How easily disorder is ignored when children are allowed their own way! The word to the jailor in Acts 16 is "Believe on the Lord Jesus and thou shalt be saved, thou and thy house". The pronouns used emphasise the personal side.

H.B. When he says, "or do ye despise the assembly of God", is he referring to their using the assembly of God for eating and drinking?

J.T. He is hinting at it. In fact, they did that, for each one ate his own supper in the presence of others.

The occasion was not intended for an ordinary meal, and they were despising the assembly. The Supper is a memorial and it makes everything of Christ. Where everything is made of Christ, in that sense, then there is room for the whole scheme of divine purpose and the divine service.

A.H. Would you say a word as to the approved being made manifest? Would they be persons that had rightly used their own houses?

J.T. I would say that. A well-regulated house is what every head ought to keep in mind, so that the children, who come out of it and come into fellowship, are ready for it, for they are hardly uninitiated. Whereas the truth of the Lord's supper is initial, yet it makes way for the great scheme of divine purpose, which involves a system in which headship shines. God Himself indeed is in mind as Head, as it says, "the head of Christ is God".

Ques. Do you think the Lord is exercising us in relation to detail, in view of His speedy return?

J.T. I think so. I think the Lord in His communications to Paul had in mind that the thing should be fully understood, because of its place in the testimony.

J.S.E. Does it imply that in our houses there is to be the element of instruction as to what is proper behaviour in the assembly of God?

J.T. I think that is the idea. That is the reason for much that the apostle says in chapter 10, which we did not read. There the cup is placed before the bread, which perhaps is something that many do not notice. It is "The cup of blessing which we bless". It is not what the Lord blesses; it is what we do; that is, what intelligent Christians do, persons who know what they are doing. Chapter 10 belongs to the earlier instruction, of course, and hence it is not a question of the order in the Lord's supper, but it is the spirit that enters into it, and shows that the cup is well thought of. Whatever is alluded to in it, indicates feeling on the part of the brethren, for it is a feeling matter. "The cup of blessing which we bless".

That is stressed so that we have the right feelings, such as belong to it. If we have these, they will enter into other things. The whole scheme of the divine mind is intended to be brought into the divine service. The millennium will not afford any such testimony as we are supposed to afford. The angels are in mind here, and they are looking on, as it says, "which angels desire to look into", 1 Peter 1:12. Hence the importance of everything being accurate, even with details, so that we are not loose in our handling of things. If we are reverential and holy in our thoughts, then we shall know how to bless. The cup is given the first place in chapter 10, in that light, because it is a question of feeling, and shows how much the Lord attaches to His memorial.

Ques. Reference was made to the approved being made manifest; does that link up, in any way, with verse 33, "So that, my brethren, when ye come together to eat, wait for one another"?

J.T. Exactly. I would think that would mean that there is to be right feeling toward each other. It raises the question as to how we regard each other, as sitting down at the Lord's supper.

Ques. Does the eating there convey the full thought of the Supper?

J.T. Yes. I would say it is a question of the whole service of the Lord's supper. We do not want to sit down piecemeal; we want to be all together. So the Lord says, "Drink ye all of it". It is a united thing, and we should wait for one another till all are present. Of course, we must not ignore the time, but then, we must not ignore the brethren. On the other hand, they should not ignore us, so that those that are late should be concerned about it. It is said of the Lord that the twelve were with Him; none of them would be late. All is intended to promote love for one another, so that we can say, We are all here. If there are only a few in the locality, well, let it be said, We are all here, for that is a great matter. The Lord values there being no absentees.

J.S.E. Is it to clear us in our minds of any thought of what is social in connection with this great occasion? In Corinth social relations were getting the upper hand.

J.T. Well, I would say that. The social idea ought to be entirely left out for it is a question of what is suitable to the Lord.

P.H.H. Is the mention of "the assembly of God" to raise our thoughts to a certain level of dignity?

J.T. That is what I believe. I was alluding to the first nine verses as abstract, and especially from verse 4, because they show that from the divine side everything is there; so that there is really no excuse for any discrepancy. If any one does not know, well, the thing is to inquire and to see to it that he does know, because we are addressed as persons who should know. Paul says, "I speak as to intelligent persons". There is so much instruction as to the Lord's supper. Why should we not know about it?

J.S.E. Would not the expression "This is my body, which is for you" lift us all in our outlook upon one another, to the same level as we are in the Lord's thoughts?

J.T. Just so. For you means that it is for us. It is not for the saints of the coming dispensation. It is the saints of the assembly that are in mind.

Ques. In the words for you, did the Lord have in view the assembly?

J.T. I think He had the assembly in mind. Paul says to the Corinthians, "I speak as to intelligent persons". Why should we not be intelligent? There is so much said about the Lord's supper and so much instruction given, for the Lord intends that the saints should be instructed as to it. I do not know of any part of Scripture that has been more stressed for the last few years, it may be for a quarter of a century, than the Lord's supper, and still something is coming up about it. If one quotes the apostle in his remark to Timothy, saying, "Let not the assembly be charged", having

in view that certain financial burdens should not fall on it, someone may say, Well, that is nothing; but it is not to be treated as nothing. The assembly is to be regarded in its dignity, and so we should watch things that are charged on the assembly, and see that things that really should not be charged to it are charged under some other account, so as to keep things right. Money, in the sense of its mere financial value, is really nothing in the Lord's mind. It is a question of His valuation of it, and His valuation of the assembly, and how it should be treated and regarded, because the assembly has the first place with the Lord.

A.R. Would you say a word as to "This is my body, which is for you". In the New Translation it does not say 'which is broken for you', nor 'which is given for you', but just "which is for you". Is there anything suggested in that?

J.T. I think it is as though the Lord would say, What a portion there is for you! And we might say it to ourselves, What a portion we have! Do we understand all that relates to it? The idea of appropriation, I think, would enter into the word "for". It is for us to appropriate all that that body means. So the Lord said of the woman in Simon's house, "In pouring out this ointment on my body, she has done it for my burying", Matthew 26:12. It was His head she anointed, showing how she observed the dignity of the Lord as to His body, for His head, of course, was His body. His head was anointed, but He said she anointed His body. Her act shows how we should regard the Lord's body, and how much is before us in the Lord's supper. The Lord said, "Wheresoever these glad tidings may be preached in the whole world, that also which this woman has done shall be spoken of for a memorial of her". She is an example for us all and it is leading up to the Lord's supper in Matthew 26.

J.W. Does the for you exclude every other family and show that the Supper is entirely for the assembly?

J.T. I would say that fully. Therefore the need of paying attention to what is said about it, and being intelligent about it, because we are addressed as intelligent persons.

Ques. In giving thanks for the bread and the cup you would have what is given by Paul peculiarly in mind rather than what is given in the close of the gospels?

J.T. Yes. It is the last word. The ministries of Matthew and Mark specially contain instruction for the faithful remnant of Israel, and run on to the millennium; whereas Paul's ministry is wholly for the assembly. Paul, who, as we know, had other ministries, had the ministry of the assembly, and he brings the Lord's supper into that because it is a question of the assembly. It is a matter relating to the assembly, and not any other family.

P.H.H. What would be the usefulness for us of the Lord's supper as set in the gospels? Would it put certain moral features in our souls?

J.T. Yes. I think it is to show the full significance of the subject by itself. But in order to get the truth of it as relating to the assembly, and the assembly only, then we must consult Paul. His ministry is the last word on all matters relating to the assembly, and especially as to the Lord's supper.

A.Al. Is that why the "I" is emphatic, "for I received ..." emphasising that this is fresh light on the Supper?

J.T. Quite so.

A.H. Referring again to the sufferings of Christ, how far would you think the apostle would have us to carry those in relation to the Supper?

J.T. It is a question of instruction. In thinking of the sufferings of Christ which stand related to the Lord's supper we are to have in our minds what the Lord left behind in the way of sufferings when He went to heaven, for all the sufferings of His saints He feels and regards as His own, as Colossians 1:24 and 1 Peter 1:11 and 1 Peter 4:13

show. The former passage specially shows that a measure, determined by the Lord in His love and wisdom, was left to be gone through by the assembly in order to bring her into full accord with Christ in the place of testimony here in the fulfilment of the will of God. They are therefore to be regarded as the sufferings of Christ which He endures in His suffering assembly; the "me" of Acts 9:4. In Colossians 1:24 Paul says, "Now, I rejoice in sufferings for you, and I fill up that which is behind of the tribulations of Christ in my flesh, for his body, which is the assembly". Paul would fill up "in his flesh" those sufferings that were behind of the tribulations of Christ. He would and did have his part with the saints in these, but further, as the special minister of Christ he suffered for the saints because he loved them. He followed the Lord in this, and in himself portrayed to the saints the sufferings of Christ as continued in the testimony here. Although the Lord was and is corporeally in heaven Paul shows in himself that the Lord would still identify Himself with the suffering position in which His saints are. Paul therefore said to Timothy "Be not therefore ashamed of the testimony of our Lord, nor of me his prisoner", 2 Timothy 1:8.

F.I. Is that not to bring to our minds the thought of His affections as the outcome of His words, "My body ... for you"? It is His love to us, so it is followed on with "in remembrance of me". According to the note here, that is to call Him to mind. Is that not so that our minds may be filled by Christ on such an occasion?

J.T. Quite so. Then another thing comes in. We say it is the Lord in glory and that is quite right, but, at the same time, when the Lord is having to do with us now, in relation to His Supper, it is as in our present circumstances, and He is nearby. If He comes to us it is in our present circumstances. He does not take us up to glory in relation to His Supper; He comes down to our circumstances, and therefore He is to be known as with us in the suffering position. I mean as to the actual

suffering that the brethren have to endure, the Lord is with them in it. Therefore, the Lord would say, as it were, 'I am in the town too'. If anything is going on in the town that is causing sufferings to the brethren, the Lord is there too. He is not to be thought of as in heaven. He is down here with us in the place of testimony. As in the midst of suffering for the testimony Paul said, "The Lord is near". He is at hand. Matthew never says that He goes to heaven. Matthew views Him down here where the sufferings are, so that He has part in them with us.

Ques. Is that the difference between Stephen and Paul? Stephen says, "I see the heavens opened"; whereas with Paul it is rather the Lord drawing near to Him and his hearing a voice. Would that suggest nearness?

J.T. Quite so.

L.H. Is that why Paul mentions the circumstances here? He says, "The night in which he was delivered up"?

J.T. Quite so. We might say the Lord is out of all these things, and He is in heaven; but He is down here where we are. He is going through the things with us.

P.L. Did not Paul get an understanding of that in the vision at Corinth, the Lord saying to him, "I am with thee", Acts 18:10?

J.T. Quite so. The Lord said to Paul, "Fear not". He was pressing on Paul that he was not to fear. The fear was there, for the actual circumstances to cause fear were there, but the Lord was with him in them. So that the Lord is in the suffering position, and He is to be called to mind thus, for the suffering position in which we are, He was in personally for the will of God. It is not that He is to be called to mind in His place up there, but in the place of sufferings. The sufferings in mind are those in which we have part as now ourselves here for the will of God.

A.S. Would the verse in John 14 "I will not leave you orphans, I am coming to you" confirm what you are saying?

J.T. It does confirm it. He is coming to us. He is not taking us up there but He is coming to us. Matthew never says that He has ascended.

P.H.H. That would make the Lord's supper a very feeling matter to us in our day.

J.T. Well, that is what I think it should be too, and some of us, perhaps, feel it more than others, because in our localities we have to go through certain things, but the Lord is with us in them.

J.S.E. Does it help to bear in mind that, in addition to Matthew, 1 Corinthians rarely touches anything that is off the earth?

J.T. It is the circumstances down here, and the local position is in mind in Corinth. "The assembly of God which is in Corinth". It is not in heaven, but in Corinth.

R.M. Would you say a word as to verse 28, "let a man prove himself, and thus eat". Why does Paul bring us down to the individual?

J.T. The eating is contingent on his proving himself, which is an important matter.

E.M. Does the unworthily enter into what you have been pointing out? It has often been connected with persons, but is it not in connection with the manner?

J.T. It is a question of the way we do things; the attitude we assume and whether we are there in a holy, reverential way. The Lord has that in mind.

Ques. Returning to the thought of nearness and the assembly as the place where the Lord is known to be near, would it not preclude references to the Lord on the throne and such like references after the Supper?

J.T. I think so. I think it is important to keep that in mind. I do not know that we have had it much in our minds, but the Lord Himself is to be regarded as being yet in the place of sufferings with His own. Though He

is not here bodily, yet He is in spirit in the place of sufferings, and He knows that we are in them too. (See Revelation 2:10, 13).

Ques He is linking Himself on with the saints, with the assembly, which is in the place where He was?

J.T. That is right.

H.B. Would the reference to His blood in the verse, "This cup is the new covenant in my blood" suggest His love feelings?

J.T. It does. It is "my blood".

W.H. Would all this lead on in assembly service to His circumstances? You have been speaking about Him coming into our circumstances in sympathy and support, but would that be in view of our entering into His, as in John 20?

J.T. I think so. The Lord is speaking about His own circumstances, and so, in the beginning of Revelation, you see Christ in relation to the assembly. It is a symbolical reference, but it is in relation to the assembly as down here; "the seven assemblies which are in Asia". The Lord is seen there in the midst of them. He is not in heaven but in the midst of them. When we come to the end of the book, the assembly is seen coming down out of heaven, which is another matter altogether, but, in the first section, it is a question of the circumstances the assembly is in, and that the Lord is in those circumstances.

J.M. So He says to Paul, "Why persecutest thou me?".

J.T. Quite so. That is a very good scripture and confirms what we are saying. Paul was persecuting at that time and the Lord felt things. The Lord's supper is only for us; for the assembly only, because it is a question of His body and of the nearness in which she is to the Lord; the nearness in which we are to the Lord.

L.E.S. Would the expression "After having supped" indicate the distinctive place that the cup has in relation to the assembly, in contrast to Judaism?

J.T. Quite so. "After having supped". It is carefully distinguished from anything else. It is just the thing by itself, and it is mentioned, I believe, lest the full thought should be overlooked in the second feature of the Lord's supper. The full thought should be carried through the whole service.

Ques. Do you mean the full thought of remembrance?

J.T. Yes. Quite so.

Rem. So that fills up the whole time of the Lord's absence until He comes.

A.McG. I want to be clear regarding the remembrance of the Lord Jesus as absent from the earth. Are we thinking of Him as absent and in glory, or here as feeling with us here?

J.T. The word "remembrance", of course, alludes to Himself, but has in mind the conditions in which the assembly is now, with which He is identified. That is what I would understand. There is really no need to introduce the thought of sufferings as regards His present place, but the remembrance carries with it the idea of what is here, where the sufferings are; and the assembly sharing in it, and the Lord sharing with us in it too. As instituting the Supper the Lord was then suffering, for the whole atmosphere around was rife with murderous feelings against Him and His own, as Matthew 26:1 - 5 shows, but these were not atoning sufferings. The sufferings indicated in Matthew 26 and elsewhere are those in which we have part, as the Lord said to His own in Luke 22:28, "ye are they who have persevered with me in my temptations". These sufferings continue and as the saints are in them the Lord is with us, feelingly with us, because we are in the position in which He Himself suffered. "I will not leave you comfortless", He said, so that He manifests Himself and is known "in the breaking of bread", Luke 24:35.

P.L. So that depth of feelings are assured as thus in concert with Christ in rejection, for all that will

follow, in spiritual feeling, in praise, in relation to the upward trend.

J.T. Quite so. The upward trend will come in the order of the service, for Ephesians contemplates that we are already seated up there, but Corinthians does not imply that nor do the gospels. It is a question of the Lord's own circumstances in the testimony and the remembrance has those circumstances in mind.

P.H.H. Does Joseph's word in the prison about remembrance bear that out?

J.T. Yes. Joseph's circumstances had not changed. He was in the prison, and the butler says, "I remember mine offences this day", Genesis 41:9. Well, that is the position; the sufferings are still present. So that as we have already remarked, the Lord says to Paul, "Why persecutest thou me?". The Lord in His body, the assembly, is going through the persecution.

A.M. The "priests of God and of the Christ" in Revelation 20:6, are a suffering company, are they not? They precede the coming out of the assembly.

J.T. Well, regarding them as the assembly now, that is important. I do not know that brethren usually attach priesthood to the saints as belonging to Christ, yet it says there that "they shall be priests of God and of the Christ". So that, at His Supper, the Lord has the priesthood. It is Christ's matter, and He has His own priesthood.

Ques. You mean in relation to Himself?

J.T. Quite so. He has His priests, and that ought to exercise us all as to whether as breaking bread we are really "priests of God and of the Christ".

W.W. Is the Lord looking for those priestly feelings when He joins us in the Supper?

J.T. I would think so. I think He is having in mind what He has personally. "This is my body, which is for you". He has the you for Himself.

P.L. Would His universal heirship as suggested in the reference to Him being the Head of every man, but

emphasise, in the Lord's supper that follows, what He has been bereft of here, and the resulting expectation of sympathy which He counts upon from the assembly?

J.T. Quite so. I think it is a very lovely thought that the Lord has His own priests. I mean to say He carries on Himself and the Father would make full allowance for that. The Lord would make full provision for the Father, but the Father makes provision for Him.

Ques. Is there power to move on to the other side unless we are well established in that which is for Christ personally?

J.T. Well, I think that is good. I was thinking, at the beginning of our meeting today, that there are a good many young here, as there are usually in these meetings, and one thanks God peculiarly for it, but perhaps they are wanting in what relates to the sense of order and the priestly state. The Lord has His own system of things that He carries on, with a view to proceeding to the Father's things.

J.M. Is it your thought that certain references to the sufferings of Christ are in order in the Lord's supper?

J.T. Yes. I would say that. He said to Paul, "Why persecutest thou me?". Well, He meant something that Paul was doing, and Paul understood that. He told the Lord later, "When the blood of thy martyr Stephen was shed, I also was standing by", Acts 22:20. He spoke about His martyr.

P.L. Would the expression, "Ye are they which have continued with me in my temptations", have some bearing upon that?

J.T. Quite so. Hence He says, "I will see you again and your heart shall rejoice, and your joy no one takes from you", John 16:22.

H.K.R. Would the believer's household, seeking to be held in the gain of headship, know something of suffering, and, as coming together in assembly, would that suffering find its expression in a proper and intelligent way?

J.T. Yes. If the household is with Him they go through the sufferings of the testimony. Onesiphorus is commended because he sought out Paul diligently and found him, and Paul desires that he should find mercy for his house in that day, because of the way Paul regarded his service.

Ques. Is it significant, in relation to the feelings, that a brother died before Paul was secured for the assembly? I was thinking of Stephen.

J.T. Well, that would bring into prominence the distinction that Stephen has.

P.H.H. I suppose the very thought of priesthood suggests a setting of suffering. There will be no priesthood, as such, in the setting of glory, will there? Does it not suggest the opposition and unholiness of what is outside and therefore, the sufferings which relate to the testimony?

J.T. Quite so.

GRACE MAINTAINED

John 20:19 - 25; John 21:1 - 14

J.T. The thought in mind is that John represents the grace side of the believer's position. Paul represents the doctrinal side, while John, coming in at the end, is left mysteriously, to be available for the Lord's will, and represents what is here in that sense in view of the end. Grace prevails from the very outset of John's instruction, life also, and it is intended to affect and characterise us to the very end. It is thus that the verses in chapter 20 afford an example of the Lord's way at the beginning, and those in chapter 21 His way at the end.

In chapter 21 there is no regard for the Lord's rights but independence on the part of leading servants, yet the Lord has no rebuke or penalty for their conduct; all through the chapter it is grace, though much could be said in the way of condemnation, showing how long the Lord can bear with us in maintaining the character of the dispensation. The brethren will see that it opens up much.

Rem. It is said in chapter 1 that "grace and truth subsists through Jesus Christ".

J.T. The word subsists, which is in the singular, shows it is there in a very pronounced way; so Paul speaks of "faith and love which is in Christ Jesus". Then we have "of his fulness we all have received, and grace upon grace". It is there in Him; but upon the saints it is the spirit of the anointing.

Ques. Is grace preservative?

J.T. It is viewed as in Christ first, then we are said to have received it, hence in chapter 1 we have "grace upon grace". In chapter 21 the disciples are found in independence, thoughtless of the Lord's rights. Verses 2 and 3 read: "There were together Simon Peter, and Thomas called Didymus, and Nathanael who was of Cana of Galilee, and the sons of Zebedee, and two

others of his disciples. Simon Peter says to them, I go to fish. They say to him, We also come with thee. They went forth and went on board, and that night took nothing". Peter, Thomas called Didymus, Nathanael, and the sons of Zebedee, were well known persons, and two more are not named. The company was a fair representation of what there was at that time and also bearing a clear allusion to the closing days. In John's gospel the Lord shows how long He can bear with those He has trusted with something.

Ques. Is it a matter of the testimony being presented?

J.T. Yes, I thought that; there are seven of them, a fair representation of what there is at the present time and of how the Lord can bear with us, making way for Himself to come in and help us as needed. He did not simply appear with rations for them, but He prepared for them to dine; a dignified thought was in His mind. The Holy Spirit would help us to understand this. Some active men are being deflected and the Lord is showing what He can do, and how He can restore us and go on with us. So that in the end we see they had taken one hundred and fifty-three great fishes, the Lord helping them in this.

W.S.S. In chapter 20 things were right. Does that show the liberty in which the Lord moves when the saints are governed by the truth? In chapter 21 we can see His movements when things are wrong.

J.T. Chapter 20 is normal Christianity, showing us how to forgive sins and how to retain them, forgiveness being put first.

W.S.S. What the Lord does in chapter 21 would show how He restores things to normality when they are abnormal.

J.T. Quite so. It also shows that the leading man has to die, that is Peter. The Lord gives to him the service of feeding the lambs and shepherding the sheep. John also has his work, but the Lord however does not say what John is to do.

Ques. Would this bear on the peace of chapter 14?

J.T. Yes, He left it with them; but here He is present with them, inaugurating the system He has in mind, setting it up in grace and the Holy Spirit's power, not simply the gift of the Holy Spirit, but His breathing it into them. He was affecting them inwardly, which will be seen in its results, involving the retention of sins if necessary.

Ques. Would there be a link with Peter and John in Acts 3 and Peter's words "Look on us"?

J.T. That is good. There is something to be seen there; it was not a question of what they knew, but of what could be seen in them. In John 9 the man whose eyes were opened speaks of what had happened to him, as he speaks to the neighbours, but to the Pharisees he speaks in the present tense. "I washed and I see", not 'I saw'. The point being what is seen now, which is generally in mind in John's writings.

Ques. Is there therefore something to be seen in this way in the disciples although they were marked by independence?

J.T. I thought so. If anyone had said anything at that point to Peter or John or Nathanael they would have had an answer then, not what they may have said previously. At the same time they were disobedient and selfish; though it is Peter that says "I go to fish", all are on the same line, not thinking of the Lord and His interests. How long He waits, for He knows what each one is capable of! Here He is setting them up in a dignified way, not simply that they were fed, but He invites them to dine, showing that there was something to be seen in them as a result of His service.

Rem. This incident would remain in their minds as expressing "grace upon grace".

J.T. It was that. It was His own doing. Grace was there in plenty, not scantily and they had received it: "of his fulness we all have received, and grace upon grace". That was at the beginning, but He would have

the same in mind at the end, and then, if anything is wrong, it would show itself.

A.M. There is only one reference to the Father in the section we read, chapter 20: 21.

J.T. Yes, it brings out the position of the servants as sent ones. The Lord was sent, so the question now comes up as to our being sent.

Ques. Does this refer to voluntary work or to our being sent?

J.T. Well, there is really no voluntary work. You cannot say you can go when you like or when you can. It is imperative to recognise this; or the testimony would fail unless there are those who hold to this principle as an obligation.

Ques. Is that the sort of spirit that comes out in Isaiah saying "send me"?

J.T. Yes, he says that because he was fit for it. He had gone through the experience involved in the "glowing coal" and he had seen the Lord, and was therefore in a fit condition to be sent.

Ques. How do brethren arrive at the consciousness of being sent today?

J.T. Well, a hundred and twenty years ago certain persons became conscious that there was something to be maintained. They began to get together having the truth of prophecy before them firstly, and we are profiting by this today. Now the question is, as having the Spirit, are we holding the truth? The Spirit is here as He was at the beginning. It is a question of how much we make room for His service when we pray; Jude says "praying in the Holy Spirit, keep yourselves in the love of God".

Rem. It was the Holy Spirit who said: "Separate me now Barnabas and Saul for the work to which I have called them".

J.T. Just so. The Lord said, "I also send you", in John 20. The "I" is somewhat emphatic in accord with John's general practice in writing. He would

emphasise the Persons, and he thus uses the personal pronoun. The Lord has sent us and the sooner we take that on and act on it the better.

W.S.S. Things may be weak but the obligation is to go on.

J.T. Just so.

Rem. You are speaking to us all, not only to the servants.

J.T. Quite, it is not a local matter only but for all. Are we standing in what we have received? Paul speaks of our standing in the things we have received (1 Corinthians 15:1). The Lord says here "Receive the Holy Spirit".

Ques. The "doors being shut" is mentioned twice. Does that suggest the vital importance of attending to this matter?

J.T. It is a divine principle to maintain a certain secrecy, for a sense of mystery attaches to our position in the truth; things are not open to everyone to look into. The doors are to be shut in a spiritual sense, to exclude all that hinders.

Ques. Is the testimony dominated by the first day of the week?

J.T. Yes, it is greatly stressed in chapter 20, and that shows that the service should be carried on unhindered. The doors were shut, not simply closed. "The doors shut where the disciples were". These were the circumstances in which the disciples were found, and Jesus came there.

Rem. There were conditions therefore to which He could come, and He showed His hands and His side to them there.

J.T. Quite. The Lord did not want to be disturbed in such a holy and precious time, He had the assembly according to what it is in His own mind before Him. Then there was the grace of their being sent, and He breathed into them saying "Receive the Holy Spirit: whosesoever sins ye remit, they are remitted to them; whosesoever sins ye retain, they are retained". This is

the whole matter; the Lord wants these conditions amongst the saints. It is an intimate matter, involving His own breathing; not as at Pentecost.

W.S.S. Would that involve the Spirit of Christ in the saints today, working out in the remission of sins?

J.T. Yes, sins are remitted; hence it is in the present tense, it is not to be delayed 'till next Lord's day', which is often the custom.

L.P. If an issue arises among us and remission is given, is it not then a completed matter?

J.T. Yes, it is completed. It is a present thing; they are remitted.

J.C.M.W. The Lord speaks "to them", we are told. Would this imply that they would be conscious inwardly of the remission?

J.T. Quite. The Lord would have much pleasure in that, and how much more we, too, should enjoy forgiving more than retaining. It is a joyous matter, if sins are really judged, that they are to be remitted and forgotten.

W.S.S. We have to ask ourselves whether we are really in line with the spirit of the dispensation.

J.T. Quite so, Galatians 6 bears on that, referring to one being taken in some fault, not overtaken by it, but taken in it. The word is "restore such a one"; that is in effect, set him up as he was before.

W. S. S. This would be a serious fault, not a momentary slip, and yet restoration is in view.

J.T. Quite, "ye who are spiritual restore such a one"; that is, he is set up unimpaired.

Ques. What determines whether sins are remitted or retained?

J.T. The meetings of assembly character. But if there is real self-judgment there must be remission and there will be joy in this. Otherwise Satan may get an advantage.

Ques. Would the trespass offering bear on all this?

J.T. The types help much. In the inauguration of the assembly we have the gospels which are necessarily short, as if words were spared by the writers, but now we have the Spirit who is patiently opening up the truth to the brethren, using all the Scriptures. At no time has there been so much opening up of the truth and the question is, Are we going in for it, having in mind the great objective, the service of God on the first day of the week?

Rem. As to Peter's recovery; he is said to have wept bitterly.

J.T. The spirit of the whole thought of recovery was there; there can be no recovery apart from self-judgment.

Ques. What is the significance of "Children, have ye anything to eat"?

J.T. It is a term of parental affection; the Lord is appealing to the erring ones. In Isaiah 9 we have the term "Father of Eternity" or 'Father of the age'; Christ takes the attitude of Father toward the disciples in this chapter.

Ques. What is involved in the eating?

J.T. It shows the Lord's gracious sympathy toward them. He raises the question as to whether we have something to eat. This question is raised in Luke 12 and the Lord says: "Blessed is that bondman whom his lord on coming shall find doing thus", that is, administering food to His household.

A.M. Would the absence of food cause weakness and lead to breakdown? Is the inward side lacking?

J.T. Well, there were seven of them and they should have had something to eat, but they had taken nothing. In Luke 24 the Lord says, "Have ye anything here to eat?" But it was not that in John 21, for He had it all ready for them; "they see a fire of coals there, and fish laid on it, and bread".

Rem. If the right kind of food is ministered, the rod would not be needed as Paul suggests.

J.T. Well, the Lord did not use the rod; it was left for a later period, not now. That is the word for us now; how long He can bear with us. He knew what was there in them, it would come out in time. The unfaithfulness was not really deep.

Ques. In view of the abundance of ministry there is at the present time, is it a question of how we answer to it?

J.T. Yes, on this occasion He gives them a meal, but at another time He asks them to provide food for others. If you get something from the Lord and give it out, it will enlarge as you do so.

Rem. May we have a further word as to the dining?

J.T. It is a question of the truth as opened up for the mind; it involves knowing how to proceed. For instance, we have the Lord's supper which opens up the service of God. We are to know what to do; it is not simply the setting of the table, though that is necessary, but there is the eating of the bread and the drinking of the cup, intelligence teaching us what to do. We are not irregular as they were at Corinth; we are accustomed to eating properly, in a dignified manner.

Ques. Is there significance in the right side of the ship?

J.T. The right side would be the place of power. In Mark the man in white was at the right side of the sepulchre, and in Luke, the angel who appeared to Zacharias was on the right side of the altar.

Rem. "Children" is a term of endearment, but "Come and dine" is on a more dignified level and would link with the first day of the week.

J.T. That is so. Later in the chapter, we again have the thought of feeding, the Lord telling Peter to feed His lambs, then to shepherd His sheep, and then to feed His sheep. These are things to be done. We are now at the end, but the feeding and the shepherding are to continue.

W.S.S. Peter had been a voluntary worker at the beginning of the chapter, but at the end he comes under the Lord's control.

J.T. Yes, he is to feed the lambs and the sheep; it is a matter of obligation.

Rem. What John said was used to recover the others.

J.T. He was one of them, of course, but "if any one love me" was also true of John. John represents that more than gift; it is the spirit of the man, and what characterised him in this sense.

Rem. Thomas was on the wrong side too, and in the lead next to Peter.

J.T. Well, Thomas is spoken of here as Didymus. How can that be brought in to the things of God? It implies a special link with someone else. He is not mentioned in chapter 20 until after the matter of remission and retention of sins. They say to him "We have seen the Lord". That is a fine bit of news, but he does not seem to value it, though Mary had told them. He says, "Unless I see ... I will not believe". A remarkable thing to say. Why should he say it? Why should he boldly discredit what the other disciples had said? It was a strong negative, his will was in it. Why should any one take up such an attitude implying that the brethren are wrong, as if to say, You go your way and I go mine; that leads to division.

Rem. Grace overcomes all that.

J.T. Well, I think so. If there is anyone here like Thomas let him be overcome by grace and be forgiven.

Rem. "Be not overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good".

J.T. Yes.

A.M. May there be unity in a wrong sense, as here, involving giving a false lead, leading to a wrong combination among the brethren; the Lord broke up this combination: it was His action.

J.T. Yes, but He did it in grace.

W.S.S. The three names mentioned were all connected with the Jewish line of things as if there were a going back to the old dispensation.

J.T. The Lord met the whole movement in grace and broke it up.

Rem. The impression one gains is, that if a serious position arises involving many persons, the situation can be saved by the introduction of grace.

J.T. I think that, but how few there are who can be relied on today! We may be met with the expression: "I go to fish". Even as in the years preceding us, such things have been said, meaning, I want my own way. A leading man wanting his own way may act so as to divide the brethren, and cause serious scattering. All such things must be met in grace, but in firmness.

Rem. So grace is on the throne. It reigns through righteousness already. Is this implied in the reference to "the third time"? (see verses 14, 17).

J.T. Just so, the reign of grace is going on, hence the reference to "the third time".

Ques. Would there be special significance in the bread? It is easier to understand the thought of the fish and its origin, but it says, "Jesus comes and takes the bread and gives it to them".

J.T. Well, we have the thought of bread explained in Psalm 104, verses 14, 15. Bread is given for man's support and strengthening, oil to make his face to shine, and wine to gladden his heart. God would thus maintain us in life and loyalty to the truth.

Ques. Do we see here love coming into action, when John says, "It is the Lord"?

J.T. That is wonderful. What a lead John gives, in saying "It is the Lord" -- Himself -- He was amongst them.

Ques. Why is the miracle of great fishes needed? It is not like the showing of His hands and His side in

chapter 20. Here the case has to be proved to them miraculously.

J.T. Quite so. Things in chapter 20 are normal, but here they are abnormal, so that a sign is needed. John gives signs as divine evidence, and this is one of them. Here the truth had to be proved miraculously.

THE SUBJECTIVE SIDE OF THE TRUTH (1)

Matthew 4:12 - 25; Matthew 28:16 - 20

J.T. It is in mind to call attention to two of the Gospels, with a view to our acquiring more knowledge of what we call the subjective side of the truth in the Scriptures. Matthew and John particularly give the subjective side of the truth, and it is thought that we should look at Matthew this morning and John this afternoon. The Gospels, so called, among other things, are intended to balance us in our knowledge of the truth. In Luke and John, for instance, we have no allusion to the forsaking of the Lord Jesus on the cross; whereas in Matthew and Mark the forsaking is specially given. Correspondingly, it is thought that the subjective side of the truth, as we call it, that is what is formed in us in a positive way, appears in Matthew and in John. What is immediately in mind, in the passage read in Matthew, is the fact that light is said to have "sprung up". The same is true as to life in John. It springs up. The water of life springs up into eternal life. In the other gospels, and especially in Acts, light is seen coming down from heaven.

In regard to what springs up, we have the idea of making, as seen in Matthew. The disciples, specially John and Peter, but the twelve generally, were to make disciples of all nations and it is thought that this should be understood, so that the idea of making disciples should be apprehended by us. It is mentioned in Acts, too, in connection with Paul, for it says "having made many disciples", Acts 14:21. Then in the passage read in Matthew 4, the Lord says to Peter, "Come after me, and I will make you fishers of men". I think it will be obvious that the thought of believers being made, in the sense of disciples and fishers, is practical and concrete.

W.C. Does it enter into God's original thought in connection with man, "Let us make man in our image?" Genesis 1:26.

J.T. I would say that. "The Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground", Genesis 2:7. It would appear that the whole man was made in a material sense, and then the breath of God was given to him, for it goes on to say, He "breathed into his nostrils the breath of life".

P.L. You referred in prayer to what was historical. Is there an allusion to a subjective state in Zebulon and Naphtali in a crisis, when it says they "jeoparded their lives unto death", Judges 5:18? The end of the Song of Deborah, "let them that love him be as the rising of the sun in its might", would be in accord with what is in view in Matthew.

J.T. I think that is good; specially if we consider Deborah and who she was. She was the wife of a man whose name signifies light. The wifely condition would be the practical side of our position. She did not represent the full thought of leadership, nevertheless she did act in leadership. Although a great sister, a great woman and a poetess, she is not mentioned among the persons of faith in Hebrews 11; Barak is the one who is mentioned, because God would have the official side, which belongs to man, in the record.

Ques. Would Deborah represent the state of soul that lay behind Barak's activities? He says, "If thou goest with me, then I will go, but if thou goest not with me, I will not go". That was a right sentiment, from that point of view, was it not?

J.T. Yes. He had confidence in her. He was conscious of the need of her. The practical side was in her and the light was in him. He was to be the leader and she herself had that in mind.

F.C.H. Have you in mind that light is in view of formation?

J.T. It is. That, I believe, is seen in the first and second chapters of Genesis. God said "Let there be light". Paul enlarges on that in saying that the light now is in the face of Jesus, which is a very practical thought. The light was necessary in the first day, before there

were any operations. It was necessary that there should be light, but we are not told what the light was on the first day, whereas we are told on the fourth day. It says then that there is a greater light and a lesser light, and these would be substantial. It was a question firstly of what light is in itself, but the New Testament says "God is light". Whether we can say it is 'substantial' is a question; but the result of it, what is brought about as the effect of it, is substantial.

Ques. Were you going to say any more about it having sprung up here in contrast to the Acts where light came down from heaven?

J.T. Well, it was just to call attention to that fact. Christianity, as seen in the Acts, connects with what comes out of heaven, what comes down, but Matthew speaks of what was here. Hence he does not record the ascension of Christ, but has in mind that He is still here with us during the whole period until the end of the age.

P.L. Does this fit in with "the word of God grew and spread itself"? In the quotation from Isaiah in the chapter we have read, we have this thought of increase, to which you alluded in prayer, "Thou hast multiplied the nation, hast increased its joy: they joy before thee like to the joy in harvest; as men rejoice when they divide the spoil", Isaiah 9:3. Is that the great Matthew issue?

J.T. Quite so. Hence the references in Matthew to the great followings which the Lord had. You cannot have too many for God if they are the kind He wants, and the Lord was seeking the kind that was needed. So Matthew mentions two or three times the large following He had. Then in Acts 2 there is a large result from the gospel, and there is an allusion to a large result later, in chapter 4, but large numbers are never referred to in connection with Paul. With him it is a question of quality and formation. The Matthew side would be the idea of numbers and then the formation. The last

passage we read alludes to the baptismal words or pronouncement; it is in "the name of the Father, and of the Son, and the Holy Spirit". Although the divine Persons are one, and "God" would apply to each at any time, yet you could not reverse the order in which They are said to be, because the wisdom of God requires it for the economy that He has in mind. So Matthew does not tell us that the Lord ascended, which is remarkable, and we have to understand that it is needed that He should remain with us and He does remain with us. He says, "where two or three are gathered together unto my name, there am I in the midst of them". It is not simply "in the midst", but "in the midst of them". That is to say He recognises or signalises the disciples because He is in the midst of them.

Ques. Is what you have in mind, that the work of God in a subjective way, links with the thought of making? Making fishers and making disciples, is to be carried on by those who accept responsibility in localities.

J.T. It is, and that is what I would understand to be the meaning of our care meetings and the service of our elders. The form care meetings have taken is almost, you might say, modern, but, anyway, the intent is the formation, the regularisation, of the persons that are there; that they are to be enlightened. One of the greatest needs existing now is that of being regulated by the principles of the truth, so that the saints are kept from the world and from sin. Care meetings have become increasingly important, because we are able to investigate. It is not simply that the ciders should do it, but the brethren are all brought into it; even if the sisters are not present they should certainly ask their husbands at home, so that the facts should be known and that there should be formation.

W.C. Would David in the cave of Adullam illustrate the way it works out? It says, "he became a captain over them; and there were with him about four hundred men", 1 Samuel 22:2.

J.T. Exactly. There were none such elsewhere. Then David came under prophetic ministry, which is just what we have and what the Lord has opened up for us, so that there might be formation. The prophet Gad came into evidence and told David what to do. He was always subject to the prophet, whether it was Gad or Nathan, for he always recognises the importance of the prophetic ministry.

P.L. So that David became greater and greater, and then it says "it was a great camp, like the camp of God", 1 Chronicles 12:22. Would that be the regulation as seen in Matthew and Corinthians?

J.T. Just so, and that means the assembly. It is not simply as it was in Acts, "the crowd of names", but an ordered assembly. The word assembly is not found immediately; it is doubtful that it is found in the second chapter, and it is doubtful if the plural is found in the ninth chapter; but anyway the idea of the assembly appears in due course, and that implies order. It implies those that are called out; those that come under subjection and walk in subjection, so that they are formed.

P.L. Does the Galilean environment, in both scriptures read in Matthew, bear on the truth of the cross in 1 Corinthians in relation to our regulation? I was thinking of the reproach of Paul in the light of the cross in 1 Corinthians and whether the 'making' process was in view as suggested in Matthew in the Galilean environment. Is that the place of reproach where all this is worked out?

J.T. Yes. The Gospels insist on the truth of the cross and so does Paul in 1st and 2nd Corinthians. The truth of the cross is marked by severity in the application of it, and in Colossians you have the extraordinary word nailing of things to the cross, so that they are fixed there.

P.H.H. The disciples at the beginning of chapter 5, are being separated from the crowd. Is that the beginning of this regularising?

J.T. I think it is. It is a striking chapter. It says, "But seeing the crowds, he went up into the mountain". It is the mountain, you will notice, as over against the plain, "and having sat down", meaning deliberation. The Lord would be deliberate in what He was about to do in view of their being formed by the truth He was about to bring out. "His disciples came to him; and, having opened his mouth, he taught them, saying, Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of the heavens. Blessed they that mourn, for they shall be comforted. Blessed the meek, for they shall inherit the earth". There are nine 'Blesseds' down to the twelfth verse, where we have "Blessed are ye when they may reproach and persecute you, and say every wicked thing against you, lying, for my sake. Rejoice and exult, for your reward is great in the heavens; for thus have they persecuted the prophets who were before you". The Lord's instruction, in Matthew, begins there properly. He is on the mount, which would be in agreement with the idea of the word assembly; that is, those who are called out. They went up themselves, as it says, "he went up into the mountain, and having sat down, his disciples came to him". He did not even call them; it is what they did themselves, showing that they themselves were affected immediately by the light that was coming out.

Rem. They seem to have got benefit from Christ and He would doubtless become attractive to them and they now come under this teaching to regularise them.

J.T. Matthew stresses teaching right through so that His followers might be affected. The fifth chapter is one of three, for the sixth and the seventh are on the same line. It is the line of teaching, but also of legislation. There are seven mountains in Matthew and what is in mind at this first mountain is legislation. The Lord refers to what others had said, but He stresses what He says.

P.H.H. Would that correspond with the word of Paul, "the things that I write ... it is the Lord's commandment"? 1 Corinthians 14:37.

J.T. It would. That word commandment is in the singular. It expresses the one idea that pervades the whole epistle, as if Paul was impressed with the need of obedience. It agrees with Romans, where the gospel is said to be "for obedience of faith among all the nations". Paul readily discerned the need of the insistence on obedience in order to form the assembly.

E.S.H. The Lord says to Peter in Matthew 16, "Blessed art thou, Simon Bar-jona". That is the responsible side, before He says, "thou art Peter" in regard to the revelation.

J.T. He is taken up by the responsible name, but the Lord has in mind to change it, and to constitute Peter material for the assembly. That is in keeping with Matthew, for it is not simply a question of light but of material. The revelation involved light, of course, that Christ is the Son of the living God, but then there was need for material; there was need for an assembly, and the Lord had in mind to build one, and Peter was to be the material. I suppose that is what is meant, and, of course, it comes into what we are saying in Matthew, for it is not simply a question of light or doctrine, but the material for the assembly, and the idea of making in order to add to it.

Ques. Does that bear on the difference you are making between teaching and legislation? Will you open that out a little more?

J.T. It would be the difference between the universities or the schools and the House of Commons. The House of Commons is the place of legislation, of making laws, and then there is the administration of the laws. Administration calls for principles and hence the need of certain laws being laid down, but teaching is for children to start with. They are to be brought up in the truth of things, so that they can handle things when the

time comes. Therefore the idea of formation or making, which we are dealing with now, is of first-rate importance.

P.L. With regard to this making, it says of David's mighty men, that he "made them chiefs", 1 Chronicles 12:18.

Ques. In verse 24 of chapter 4 we see a large range of enemy power, but there is power down here to meet it. The Lord had to say to every form of it and He healed those who needed healing. Is that all in view of teaching?

J.T. That is why, I think, Matthew omits the ascension. It is to stress the idea of the presence of the Lord here. We have to understand the presence of the Lord here continuously as applied to assembly service as well as to service generally.

W.C. As to light springing up, would the thought apply now in local assemblies?

J.T. I think it would. So the local assembly is immediately mentioned by Paul in the first epistle to the Corinthians. It is to support Matthew. The apostle would imply that the truth of Matthew has to be maintained, and that it had to be maintained at Corinth. The Lord said to Paul, "I have much people in this city", Acts 18:10. That is important to keep in mind because of the need of formation and teaching and of administration too. So that in the beginning of Corinthians we have the assembly. The first mention of the assembly in Corinthians is in chapter 1, "the assembly of God which is in Corinth". That is a great expression which is in keeping with Matthew 16.

P.H.H. Is the local position hinted at in the reference to the Lord Jesus leaving Nazareth and going and dwelling at Capernaum? Is that to lay some stress on the locality where the Lord is?

J.T. I think that is right. It is to a locality that would not be any advantage to Him or to anybody, physically. Capernaum would be considerably lower even than the surface of the Mediterranean. Therefore there was a disadvantage in dwelling at Capernaum in

preference to Nazareth, which was a considerable number of feet higher.

Ques. Does the appellation. "Men of Galilee" in Acts 1:11 suggest that the truth had taken shape in a substantial sense, that they had been made?

J.T. Quite so. The Lord took great pains in dealing with certain facts needed to adjust the saints. Among them were such things as divorce and the like; matters that were of great importance in the households. Undoubtedly Matthew 5 was intended to lay the basis for the assembly in the sense of teaching. In this part of Matthew He is directing the disciples to their Father, to God, for they were to be imitators of their Father in the heavens.

Ques. As to the process of making; is the putting of the material together in mind in Matthew 16 in the Lord's word, "I will build my assembly"?

J.T. Just so. The first thought as to building we get is in Genesis 2 in reference to the woman.

A.H.G. Has the sovereignty of God to be recognised in connection with the thought of making, as we see in Romans 9:20, "Shall the thing formed say to him that has formed it, Why hast thou made me thus?"

J.T. We are to be submissive and not to admit of our own will in what God does. I think the great letters to Corinth, especially the first, are in keeping with that. They are to maintain the truth of Matthew in the local position.

F.C.H. As to things being effaced and nailed to the cross, would the record of the forsaking of Christ so definitely mentioned in Matthew have this in view?

J.T. It is remarkable that the forsaking is found there and in Mark. The cross is stressed in the epistle to the Colossians, to which you have alluded. The thought of nailing things to the cross, would refer, I think, to Jewish things, and they are the most difficult to handle.

G.W.B. Would the Lord's word in chapter 18, "two of you", imply formation in those who agree and ask?

J.T. Quite so. The idea of agreement must be there, and it is to ask the "Father who is in the heavens", showing that the heavenly side is also found in Matthew. The you in the expression "two of you" is, I think, an allusion to the assembly, for the assembly is formed of persons. It was a great thing to belong to that company and their number is given at the beginning. It says, "the crowd of names who were together was about a hundred and twenty", Acts 1:15. That is ten times twelve. I suppose there is something in that, but it was a great matter to belong to that company. There is no such august group of people on the earth as the assembly, but then it is not simply a group of people, it is a building, as the Lord said, "on this rock I will build my assembly", Matthew 16:18.

Ques. Are there special occasions when the name disciples might have application to us now?

J.T. The word is not much used in the epistles; it is more used in the gospels. It is more initial, and I believe that the Spirit of God would in this link on with Enoch; that is to say, with the idea of learning. He is the seventh from Adam, the principle of learning being cumulative.

W.H. In verse 19, the Lord says to Peter and Andrew, "I will make you fishers of men"; but in the case of the other two brothers, He does not use any such expression.

J.T. In Matthew 4:21, in connection with James and John, I think, the idea of the father is in mind, for they were with their father; that is not mentioned as to Peter and Andrew. What characterises them is that they are brothers; brothers in the flesh, and the Lord sees that they were casting a net into the sea. It says, "for they were fishers"; that is, their occupation is in mind and they are working on their own; they are not working

with their father. It is not a family affair. Then the Lord brings in this thought, "I will make you fishers of men", and it says, "they, having left their trawl-nets, immediately followed him". That means that the principle of leaving something enters into this whole matter. It is not simply that I have a side line to my own affairs, and that side line is Christianity, or the gospel, or the like, but that my main thought is in my business. That will not do for the Lord or the Spirit of God. It says "they ... left their trawl-nets, immediately". Luke adds to that somewhat and says, "leaving all they followed him". Then it goes on here to say, "And going on thence he saw other two brothers, James the son of Zebedee and John his brother, in the ship with Zebedee their father, mending their trawl-nets, and he called them; and they, having left the ship and their father, immediately followed him". They do something further, for they left the ship and their father. The others left their trawl-nets but John and James, I would think, are to be noted as having left more.

P.L. Would the brotherly reference of Luke to Matthew, the writer of this gospel, emphasise that? He says, speaking of Matthew, "having left all, rising up, he followed him", Luke 5:28. It is such a one who writes this gospel.

Ques. Have you in mind that these two sets of brothers are, in a way, an advance on the idea of disciples, having the assembly in view?

J.T. I think so, especially with the thought of making added to it, for there would be skill acquired thus. We need skill in handling the things of God. John puts Peter and Andrew together, and tells us that Andrew had sought out Peter.

Ques. Would "fishing" be on the line of the gospel, but "the mending of the nets" be the maintenance of right principles to preserve what is caught? Both are required in the working out of the truth formatively.

J.T. Quite so. In John 21 the Lord takes in hand the restoration of the disciples who had turned away from the service, but John does not say that the Lord reproved them. That is to say, John would ease things a bit, and make restoration as easy as possible for us. It is not that principles or the truth are forsaken, of course, but the Lord does not reprove them, and that, I think, is a very important thing to keep in mind. They went fishing, it says, but they did not catch anything. In the earlier instruction in Luke 5 the catch was very large and the partners are brought into it, but in John 21 they did not catch anything; nevertheless, the Lord does not reprove them, and it is to be added with comfort, that they found on the beach "a fire of coals there, and fish laid on it, and bread". Whoever caught the fish, or made the bread, is not stated, but the Lord invited them to dine, without a word of reproof. Then He says, "Bring of the fishes which ye have now taken". There were one hundred and fifty-three great fishes which shows the result of the Lord coming in without reproof. Someone has spoken about the Lord's 'unrebuking gaze'. Even in such circumstances He can, if necessary, reserve His rebuke and He reserved it here in instructing the seven who went out fishing. The fish were brought, and then the probing ensues, but the probing of Peter is to bring out that this man, of whom the Lord said He would make him a fisher of men, had to do something himself. He had to probe himself as to whether he loved the Lord more than the others did.

Ques. Is there instruction in the use of the word for mending in Matthew 4:21, and in its being the same as united in 1 Corinthians 1:10 and restore in Galatians 6:1?

J.T. That helps as to the restoration, or recovery of the brethren. We need not always contemplate disciplinary action in our first approach to a matter causing sorrow. It may have to come, but it ought to be the last thought, for we want to gain the brethren; that

is what the word in Galatians 6 means, "Ye who are spiritual restore such a one". It is not 'if you can', but it is assumed that they can do it.

Ques. Do you mean that, although it may become impossible, restoration would be the primary object in view in any visitation?

J.T. This is discipline, of course; yet, at the same time, although the apostle is severe in his word to the Galatians, he is not severe in chapter 6 as to someone taken in a fault.

P.H.H. Would the section of John 21 to which you have referred be a sample of "whose soever sins ye remit, they are remitted to them"?

J.T. Just so. That is what the Lord says. Remission is a very important matter.

It is thought that Matthew 28 augments what we began with, namely what happened at Capernaum. There we have the thought of light springing up instead of coming down, and what we have already remarked as to formation. Chapter 28 brings in the work they are given to do; to "make disciples of all the nations". These would be a most difficult kind of people, because they are nations, they are not trained from the divine standpoint; they are just raw material, but the Lord proposes that they should make disciples of them. Governed by this thought in the little work that we have to do; that is, the brethren with whom we are all walking, we are endeavouring to get souls. The Lord's word is, "Yet will I gather others to him, besides those that are gathered". Isaiah 56:8. We are entitled to expect gathering, but it is with persons who are already, more or less, affected by the truth of Christianity generally, that we have to deal.

Eu.R. There were disciples whom Paul could embrace in Acts 20. They had been made, and then it says there were many lights. Is that like light springing up?

J.T. I think they would be suggestive of the seven whom Paul had with him. They were the evidences of

his work in different localities, so that the places whence they came are mentioned. I believe that God's intent was that Paul should have evidences of his work, which could be examined at any time. According to Galatians 2:1, Titus was there at Jerusalem, at the meeting recorded in Acts 15, and Paul says they did not compel him to be circumcised. The fact is that they could not produce anyone better than Titus at Jerusalem. I think the workman should have some example or model to show what can be done or what he has done.

Ques. Some effect of his ministry in a person?

J.T. That is what I was thinking. Whether it be his wife or his child, or anybody near by, or whoever it may be, bring them forward to show what can be done. It is not simply what God can do, but what the disciples can do. We have already alluded to David and what happened in the cave of Adullam. It is a question not only of what these men had been, but what they became through David's training and example, and the prophetic word of Gad too (1 Samuel 22:5). The position in Judah is to be added too, for Judah's was a place of special favour in the counsels of God. The prophet's word on that occasion was, "get thee into the land of Judah".

P.H.H. Is the reference to power in Matthew 28 all the more remarkable seeing that the company was incomplete? There are only eleven disciples, and it says of them that "some doubted". Would that be an encouragement to us in our day to understand that the power is not diminished?

J.T. Quite so. As we approach chapter 28, many questions are raised in our minds. There is what the soldiers did, and what the Jews did. What stumbling-blocks there were to obstruct the work of God! The Lord, however, does not instruct His own near Jerusalem, but He says, "go into Galilee". They are only eleven, and they have to go a long way to meet Him. Later that company would be restored to its number twelve.

Allusion has been made to the idea of mending in Matthew 4:21, and 1 Corinthians 1, and then Paul's word in Galatians 6:1 to the restoration of a soul.

The word restore has reference to a person who has been taken in some sin. John 8 tells us about one who was taken in sin, and it tells us, too, how the Lord met that case. But the apostle says, "ye who are spiritual restore such a one"; so that when we come to discipline, we must think of those who are spiritual. It is not simply those that are at the care meeting, but those who are spiritual; that is the point that Paul makes. "Ye who are spiritual restore such a one in a spirit of meekness, considering thyself lest thou also be tempted". The apostle Paul carries the thing through as expressing what Christianity implies in relation to recovery. We are living in a time of recovery, and the way of Paul is the thing to be kept in mind. The Lord selected him for a purpose, and he was to be an example to everybody. So he stresses the idea of persons who are spiritual, and that they are to restore the man. It is not if they can do it, but they are to do it.

P.L. The scrutiny in the healing of the leper to be restored is exclusively in the hands of the priests?

J.T. That is what it is exactly, so the Lord sends the leper to the priest.

A.McG. Would Elihu's service to Job help? He says, "If there be a messenger with him, an interpreter, one among a thousand, to show unto man his duty", Job 33:23. The footnote to the word duty gives the meaning as in judging himself.

J.T. That helps.

E.B. I would like to ask whether "taken in some fault" in Galatians 6 is merely a sudden lapse, or whether it may even include a grave case of evil?

J.T. We are not told what the case is; he is taken in it, however. It is not in the sense that he is caught in it, or overtaken in it. The fault is there and the thing is unquestionable. What the apostle intimates is that the

spiritual are capable of restoring such a one, and that is, I believe, to bring out the superiority of Christianity in the epistle to the Galatians.

E.B. So that the scripture in Galatians applies to cases of evil.

J.T. That is, to certain cases.

A.M. It is remarkable that the ministry of James closes with that service. "He that brings back a sinner from the error of his way".

J.T. Yes, quite so. "Shall save a soul from death and shall cover a multitude of sins". That is to bring out the greatness of the action.

Rem. In view of what you are saying, and the balancing of the scriptures, it is noticeable that there is no suggestion of this kind when Paul writes in 1 Corinthians 5.

J.T. There is not. There is, however, something to be said there, that the Corinthians did not think that the man would be restored so soon.

Rem. I was thinking rather of the call to action, so to speak, and the characteristics mentioned in the list that Paul gives in 1 Corinthians 5. It is a course indulged in so that the person has, for the time at least, been characterised by something. Wisdom is needed to determine into what category a matter falls.

J.T. Quite so. Only that Paul says of the person, "being such". The thing must be clear, that he is what is stated. Then the word is, "that the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus". That is the point; but then the Corinthians were not ready for the early recovery of the man, and that is a thing to be noticed. They were not restoring him when they might have done so. He was already recovered in his soul and they did not apparently know it.

Rem. In 1 Corinthians 5 it says they were not mourning about the sin. They were allowing the sin and even glorying in it, so that it was necessary that the

truth should be brought home in such a powerful way by Paul.

J.T. Quite so. In the whole company.

Ques. Is it not a fact that those who may be lax in regard of what may be required for assembly action may also be lax in discerning the work of God in a person who is repentant?

J.T. Therefore the need of having an eye for anything of God in the person. Sometimes it is said, Well, just leave him or her, as the case may be. "Ephraim is joined to idols: leave him alone", Hosea 4:17. That may be true sometimes, but then is that so in every case?

E.C.M. In the second epistle the apostle says, "ye should rather show grace and encourage, lest perhaps such a one should be swallowed up with excessive grief", 2 Corinthians 2:7. Would that link up with the thought of the priest?

J.T. Quite. That is the priest's work. All these things suppose the existence of the priest, and the Lord would not expect us to effect the things unless the priest was there. So Leviticus always assumes the presence of the priest. It is not if he is there; it always assumes that he is there.

Ques. Then supposing the priest visits and cannot bear testimony to any alleviating circumstance, he does not proceed with restoration at the time, does he? With the leper, for instance, there were certain matters that would preclude him coming back to the camp. So is it not a question of determining, at the time, the category into which the person comes?

J.T. Just so.

P.H.H. It says in Leviticus 14:3, "when the priest looketh, and behold, the sore of leprosy is healed in the leper". Would that be like the work of God which must precede the process of cleansing and restoring, as we might say, to fellowship?

J.T. There is hardly time to go into that chapter now but it is very important to examine the process

Of restoring the leper and its bearing on the restoration of a man or woman to fellowship, after they have forfeited it by their conduct. Chapter 14 gives us an account of that, and it is remarkable to note these things that are mentioned; especially the priest and how the anointing oil is poured into his hand and then put on the he ad of the cleansed leper, so that he is anointed. He is set up; as Galatians would say, he is restored. The word restore, according to the note, means mending him; setting him up again to function among the saints; that is what is meant.

P.L. Would the going down of pain and the embrace of Eutychus be a little like the priest going outside the camp and restoring Eutychus to his privileges and place? You referred once, happily, I thought, to the Lord on the cross in relation to His service to the dying thief, going out as the priest in relation to the leper. Do you too not think there should be more preparedness with us Identity oneself with the condition?

J.T. I think Galatians is remarkable, because the word restore, in view of what it means, shows that the thing is completely done. The person has forfeited his position and he is useless in the service, but he is to be set up again. That I understand, is the meaning of the word, so that the brother or sister is set up again as he used to be.

P.L. "Mark ... profitable to me for the ministry"?

J.T. Exactly. So that we have not lost him.

J.C.W. Would you say what you had in mind when you distinguished between being overtaken and taken?

J.T. The word overtaken is not there. The person, whoever he or she may be, is taken in the fault, like the woman in John g. The fault is unquestionable; you have no need to prove it; but the point is to restore him; set him up again to be of use in the economy of God.

Ques. Does all this involve that we are in the good of "all things whatsoever I have enjoined you"; that we ourselves are held in relation to divine legislation? If

there is looseness with us in matters we shall be loose in our dealings with others.

J.T. I am sure that is right.

P.L. Would you say the great outstanding features of the dispensation shine severally in the bringing in of I, teach of the divine Persons, who give character to it; the Father, in grace; the Son, in liberty and dignity; and the Holy Spirit, in power?

J.T. Exactly, and the Holy Spirit is here with you all the time in a peculiarly personal way. Matthew also tells us that the Lord said, "behold, I am with you all the days". That has to be understood according to what was in the Lord's mind, but the Spirit is here in a permanent way as the Lord said, "I will beg the Father, and he will give you another Comforter, that he may be with you for ever". What is meant, I am sure, is the first-hand knowledge that the Spirit has of all that relates to the testimony and its requirements. He knows what has happened from the beginning.

P.L. So the "communion of the Holy Spirit" (2 Corinthians 13:14), refers to His place here as the Companion of the saints in the wilderness and in the assembly as in Corinthians?

J.T. Quite. Paul's word in 1 Corinthians 12:3, is very striking; "no one can say, Lord Jesus, unless in the power of the Holy Spirit". The Spirit must be here if the service of God is to go on, and to invoke the name of the Lord Jesus must not simply be in words, but in feeling. That is what is implied, I am certain, in the idea of the power of the Holy Spirit.

THE SUBJECTIVE SIDE OF THE TRUTH (2)

John 3:1 - 8; John 4:7 - 14

J.T. It is thought that John's ministry was reserved by the Lord to cover the whole dispensation, with special reference to the closing days, in view of the subjective side of the truth. Christendom has lost that side of the truth in having recourse to creeds and mere doctrines, whereas the Lord had in mind that the Spirit should be here, and that, as having come, the Spirit would remain here until the coming of the Lord and it is believed that the recent revival, in which we have part, is the outcome of this. The Spirit had been here even in the darkest ages, but under great disadvantages, because of the systematic religion which held the saints in its power. Where that is admitted it will ever obstruct the working out of the truth. These scriptures are read having all this in mind. Nicodemus provides us an example of one to whom the Lord could speak. He was a gifted man, or a minister, but an inquiring man. That is essential, for inquiries are used, under the Lord, to bring out the truth; they may expose themselves, and their ignorance, but they serve the purpose. Nicodemus, as we have often noted, is distinguished in the "But" of the first verse of chapter 3. It says of the Lord in the previous paragraph, "when he was in Jerusalem, at the Passover, at the feast, many believed on his name, beholding his signs which he wrought. But Jesus himself did not trust himself to them". That is to be noted; it is not simply that He did not trust them, but He "did not trust himself to them, because he knew all men, and that he had not need that any should testify of man, for himself knew what was in man". The whole race of man was thus under the Lord's eye and known to Him, and, although many made inquiry as to the truth, not being able to resist the testimony of the signs, the Lord did not trust Himself to them. I suppose He would not trust Himself

to any save those in whom the Holy Spirit had liberty, and fully to the assembly.

Ques. Do you mean the "But ... Nicodemus" lifts him out of the class the Lord could not trust? He is thus representative of those in whom God was operating.

J.T. That is what I was thinking. It indicates that eventually there would be someone to whom the Lord could commit Himself. Systematic religion is not trustworthy as to the Lord, whatever terms it may use; even though they may be right up to a point, He cannot be trusted to them.

A.H.G. Does the Himself involve the truth of His Person?

J.T. I would say that. In chapter 2 it is said that they inquire of the Lord for a sign, and He says, "Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up. The Jews therefore said, Forty and six years was this temple building, and thou wilt raise it up in three days? But he spoke of the temple of his body. When therefore he was raised from among the dead, his disciples remembered that he had said this, and believed the scripture and the word which Jesus had spoken". I should hardly think, by his bringing the spices for the Lord's burial, that Nicodemus had ever come to that sign and what the Lord implied in raising up His body. John in his record makes the most of Nicodemus, but that most was not very much. He was, in a certain sense, a genuine kind of man, but he remained in the council of the Jews. There are many like that today, persons who remain in the world's councils, yet professing some regard for the Lord.

Ques. Is the value of the incident really in the truth that the Lord brings out of it, rather than in Nicodemus himself?

J.T. The thing that the Lord brought out of it was from Himself, not from what Nicodemus said, for Nicodemus said some poor things. At the same time, as we have said, there was something there, but we do

not want to identify ourselves, in this hour of the dispensation, with Nicodemuses, because they are not fully reliable. If we would have the truth we have to trust in the Lord Himself, and what He brings out.

P.H.H. The whole race of man being in view here, is it also in view now, that there should be a new race on the principle of new birth, a race which the Lord can own, and in whom God can operate?

J.T. That is just what I was thinking. It is said, "Jesus himself did not trust himself to them, because he knew all men". That is, whether they were Jews or gentiles. We have arrived now at much that men are saying, about God and Christ, but they are very untrustworthy things, even although those who say them have reputation and their systems may have reputation. So it goes on to say, "he had not need that any should testify of man", not of any particular man, but man as a race, as an order of being, "for himself knew what was in man".

Ques. Is that what Paul had in his mind when he said to the partisans, at Corinth, "are ye not carnal, and walk as men?", 1 Corinthians 3:3. They had not been delivered from that order, had they?

J.T. Take anything there is today, whether it be legislative councils, or governments or religious councils; whether it be American, Asiatic, or European, there really is nothing to be trusted, when it comes to the Lord Himself. There is not a thing that can be relied upon to look after the Lord and His interests any more than there was when He was a Babe.

F.C.H. What is involved in verse 22, where it says that the "disciples remembered that he had said this, and believed the scripture and the word which Jesus had spoken"?

J.T. It shows that the Lord's resurrection was awaited for the confirmation of everything. Thus the endings of the gospels are intended to provide that confirmation, for they are a witness to the Lord's resurrection.

But then there is more than that, for the Lord is not only risen but He is ascended, and the Holy Spirit has been sent down.

A.H.G. Where it speaks in the end of the gospel of Jesus Himself standing in the midst, would that indicate that a certain trustworthiness had been brought to light?

J.T. Quite so. There it was, in John 20:16. Mary Magdalene herself had proved what was needed, for she says, "Rabboni", meaning 'My Teacher'. She becomes representative of the results of real Christian teaching, reliable teaching, as distinct from the creeds; and not teaching from merely educated persons, or the universities. Then another thing comes up, the shutting of the doors, and that brings up the question of the mystery. It has to be understood that things are in mystery, for our position as of the assembly is a mysterious one. The parabolic teaching, recorded by Matthew, implies mystery. Things have to be in mystery for they cannot be trusted to men unless they are men that are truly born again. The foundational thought is the new birth, and that is what we are dealing with now in John 3.

P.H.H. Does that ensure that trustworthiness shall be there from the very start, because it is God's action?

J.T. Just so. The Lord says, in answer to Nicodemus, "Verily, verily". Notice the words "Verily, verily" here, which occur twenty-five times in this gospel, and not at all elsewhere in this double form. We must have what is really true in Christianity. "Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except any one be born anew he cannot see the kingdom of God". He might be the most brilliant man, so to say, in any province of science, but, whatever else he may see, he cannot see the kingdom.

Ques. Do you think we arrive practically, in the history of our souls, at the necessity of new birth, as over against the acceptance of it as doctrine?

J.T. Just so. There are those who make much of it; not that we want to speak of others, but it is the beginning and end of Christianity with some. We have

to go deeper than mere stereotyped ideas and confession for the truth, in order to discover where people are in their souls.

Ques. Is what we are dealing with here really the start in the sovereign operations of God which are at last recognised in the expression of the man in Romans 7 when he says "I myself"?

J.T. I would say that. "I myself" is the real man. You notice similar reference here, as to the Lord Himself -- "Jesus himself", John 2:24.

W.C. What is the distinction between what we had this morning as to God with us, and then this thought of the Lord trusting Himself to persons? You were saying that the fact that Jesus Himself did not trust Himself to man implied that conditions were in view to which He could trust Himself. Would that be to reinforce the position, as seen in Matthew, in a subjective way?

J.T. I think so. We are speaking of Matthew 4 and the light springing up; then the number of persons who followed the Lord was stressed; and then the regulation of the persons on the mount of legislation; chapters 5 to 7. It is important to have before us that it was not simply the mount of administration, but the mount of legislation, where right laws were enacted, or unfolded; the word unfold was used as to Moses in Deuteronomy 1:5. He unfolded the law, and Matthew unfolds the thing that was needed for the assembly in its government. I think the idea of the light springing up would show that the Lord had come in in relation to a certain class or race of people. The generation of Jesus Christ, in Matthew, is traced through forty-two generations, three sets of fourteen. It is as if God would test out what there was in Israel in view of His Son coming in and being received here. The many generations with which the testimony has been identified up to our own time must be tested out so as to discover what is reliable. God had been working from the very beginning and

continued through these forty-two generations. They are not taken from Adam; they are taken from Abraham; that is to say, it began with a man sovereignly selected by God. We have to bear all that in mind in order to get at Matthew's point of view.

W.C. Do you mean that John goes back further still to man as such?

J.T. Yes. He goes on to the Word. He says, "In the beginning was the Word". That is to say, One capable of unfolding the mind of God. John has in mind not simply the setting forth of signs, but the unfolding of the mind of God.

A.H.G. Would what is here in John 3 show the basis of trustworthiness?

J.T. It is a question of what the Spirit of God does; that is the point that we are at, and that we can have nothing without Him. That is implied in the start with Abraham, for he is a man that God Himself took up and said to him, "Fear not, Abram: I am thy shield, and thy exceeding great reward", Genesis 15:1. God had a man that He could rely upon, for Abraham was a reliable and trustworthy man; and so are those who are truly his children.

Ques. Do I understand that, whilst in Christ as the Word there was the perfect expression of what God was, it needed God's operation in men for that light to be received?

J.T. Quite so. There was this great thought which had not been understood, although the Old Testament had contained it in principle. The idea of the new birth was there in Ezekiel, but not understood; and the question is whether it is understood now. The first thing is how persons are to see the kingdom. We can easily see man's kingdom, whether it be a republic or whatever else it may be, but we cannot see God's kingdom without this great transaction which is said to be effected by the Spirit. It is to bring out the reality of the Spirit's operations.

Rem. Ezekiel makes the subjective thought clear in his reference to this, "I will put my Spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my statutes and keep mine ordinances", Ezekiel 36:27.

J.T. Ezekiel has a striking place in the prophets, and amongst the things he deals with is this matter of new birth, and God putting His Spirit within people, which goes beyond new birth. The mere fact of new birth does not mean that a person has the Spirit. It means that he is affected by the Spirit; the operation has taken place.

Ques. Does the Lord, in this gospel, rejoice to call attention to Abraham as one who could see?

J.T. Just so. The Lord says, "Abraham rejoiced to see my day", John 8:56. How far-seeing he was! The writer of the epistle to the Hebrews, too, says of those who died in faith that they "not having received the promises, but having seen them from afar off and embraced them", Hebrews 11:13.

J.P.H. Would you make a little clearer how you link on what is subjective with this operation in the soul. Is it a necessary foundation for it, or is there a subjective character in it?

J.T. This is a subjective element. The Lord says, "Verily, verily", and again I would remark as to these two words which have a peculiar place in John, the expression occurring twenty-five times. Surely there must be something in it; for it is not recorded elsewhere. John was a truthful, reliable man, and this would accentuate the idea of reliability in ministry. "Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except any one be born anew". That, as I understand it, means from top to bottom. (The note, which is important, says, Not only 'again', but 'entirely afresh', as from a new source of life and point of departure; translated in Luke 1:3, 'from the origin'; that is Luke says he knew "from the origin": that is this same word.) That means, born from a new source entirely.

Eu.R. Would you explain a little your expression that it affects a person from top to bottom?

J.T. It affects him in all his faculties. It is not physical, but he is affected in a moral sense, although, of course, it will affect his physical members as to how he uses them. It affects all the faculties whatever they may be. I believe that is what is meant.

P.H.H. Would it give the capacity to respond to the light?

J.T. The members we have are also to be controlled; they are to be controlled by the life which we have by the Spirit, resulting from the Spirit in us, which is distinct from this operation of new birth. The Spirit dwelling in us controls our faculties.

Ques. Is that what Paul means when he says, "the Spirit life on account of righteousness"?

J.T. Just so.

J.P.H. Would it be right to connect Colossians 3 with this matter? We have such expressions as "Put to death therefore" and then "put off the old man" and "put on the new" mentioned in that chapter.

J.T. I think it can be connected. The new man has to be considered to see how it works out in the history of the race. Has the race been affected by what is presented in the testimony of God, as in Judaism or Christianity? If it has been affected, the evil implied in the old man is apt to develop in that very setting. The old man is perhaps more accentuated in persons who are affected by what is religious. I would like to dwell on this point, for it seems to me that it has not been understood. We have to consider the ways of Egypt and the ways of Canaan. The ways of Egypt represent just the natural state of man as he is without being affected by anything religious, or anything, in any sense, of God. Whereas if man is merely externally affected by what is of God, his character becomes more like the ways of Canaan, and these have especially affected a part of the human race. If you have to deal with that,

you have the worst kind of evil, the worst features of the old man. Whereas in Colossians the idea of the new man is what is fresh. It is fresh as just affected by God immediately and therefore the more reliable.

Ques. Is that why Moses is so drastic in his instructions to the people in view of their going into Canaan? He says, "Ye shall utterly destroy all the places wherein the nations which ye shall dispossess have served their gods, upon the high mountains, and upon the hills, and under every green tree; and ye shall break down their altars, and shatter their statues, and burn their Asherahs with fire", Deuteronomy 12:2, 3.

J.T. The state to be dealt with in Canaan as Israel went into it was solely from the devil, but, if the old man is affected by anything that is professedly of God, the evil state is apt to be more deep and deceptive and subtle.

P.L. Is that why the Egyptian is allowed finally into Israel and the Canaanite excluded?

J.T. Quite so, and the Canaanite is cursed. Noah said: "Cursed be Canaan". Sometimes it is assumed that Ham was cursed, but he is not; it is Canaan that was cursed. It is a man that behaves as Ham's son did.

Eu.R. Would the Lord deliver Nicodemus from all that he was as the teacher of Israel?

J.T. Well, yes, although the Lord rather noticed it. There is something which ought to be noted in any persons we may have to do with like this. This man, who is a teacher, and who is seeking Jesus by night, discerns that He is of God. The Lord says to him, "Thou art the teacher of Israel and knowest not these things!" That is to say, the teacher of Israel, in such a man as Nicodemus, might read the Scriptures, and that is not to be despised. If the Scriptures are resorted to, as by Herod in Matthew 2, to murder Jesus, then it is another matter, but Nicodemus had no such thought. Nicodemus was a man that discerned that Jesus was of God.

P.H.H. You would say that the giving and receiving of the Spirit are evidently subsequent to this great matter of new birth.

J.T. They are; because the giving and receiving of the Spirit lead us to a higher level of the truth than Nicodemus had reached or was capable of understanding so far. We find it in Paul's ministry. In Acts 19 reference is made to the giving and receiving of the Spirit. There were twelve men there having John's baptism, the number being in view of administration. They had some light about God and about Christ, but they did not have light about the Spirit. They had not even heard that He was come. But still Paul clearly attaches importance to the administrative number at Ephesus, because of the structure that was intended to be reared up there.

P.H.H. What has the Lord exactly in mind in saying, in verse 5, "Except any one be born of water and of Spirit"? Previously He says "born anew".

J.T. Well, I think "born of water" implies that the doctrine, or teaching, is accompanied by a purifying effect. Now we have the word regeneration, which is only found in Matthew and in Titus, and that means something more than an ordinary external change. It would imply the idea of born of water and the Spirit. The regeneration refers to the millennial condition of things, and that implies the presence of the Spirit in some sense here on earth, and the effect of it, and it is called the regeneration.

P.H.H. A wholly new state of things?

J.T. Just so.

Ques. The note to the verse in Titus reads, 'Regeneration is not the same word as being born again, nor is it used so in Scripture. The force of the word is a change of position; a new state of things. The word is only used here, and in Matthew 19:28 for the Saviour's coming kingdom'. That is followed in Titus by the

expression "and renewal of the Holy Spirit". Would not that show that that was subsequent?

J. T. Well, quite so. These references I think help us as to the new birth, and the second reference, which includes the thought of water, implies that a purifying effect is attached to or included in the thought of the new birth.

A.H.G. Would the receiving of the Spirit be involved in being born of water and the Spirit?

J.T. No. The reception of the Spirit is not in either illustration of new birth. Redemption was required which shows that although the Old Testament saints had certain things it was in a very shallow and limited way. Nevertheless they were there and that is what brings out the value of Abraham and the forty-two generations through which the Messiah should come.

Ques. Would you use the word potential in relation to this matter, as over against what is substantial? It is not exactly that new birth is the end of a story, but is it not the initial thing in view of a great many other things? Does not the gift of the Spirit and the reception of the Spirit come in subsequently to fill out what is in mind in the potential operation of God?

J.T. Then the Lord says later in the passage, "We speak that which we know, and we bear witness of that which we have seen, and ye receive not our witness. If I have said the earthly things to you, and ye believe not, how, if I say the heavenly things to you, will ye believe? And no one has gone up into heaven, save he who came down out of heaven, the Son of man who is in heaven. And 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" (verses 11 - 15). Redemption is implied before one could receive the Spirit and therefore the Old Testament saints did not have the Spirit in the sense in which it is predicated of us. The true sense of the reception of the Spirit was not there, for David had to ask Jehovah

not to take it from him. There is no such thought as the Spirit being taken from a person now. He remains with us for ever. The great operations of God in believers are contingent upon the Spirit, and not only on the Spirit here, but on the Spirit in the persons.

E.C.M. Does the verse in chapter 7 have any bearing, "the Spirit was not yet, because Jesus had not yet been glorified"?

J.T. It has. He had to be glorified in order that the Spirit should come down. So the word is, "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. The thing was there substantially.

J.S.E. Would it help to draw a contrast between this statement as to the water and the Spirit, and the statement in the epistle to the Corinthians, "flesh and blood cannot inherit God's kingdom"? Is this presented in Nicodemus, as representing the best in nature up to date, and yet asserting that, on that line, nothing is possible, relative to the kingdom of God?

J.T. That brings up a matter that deserves inquiry. The passage in Corinthians implies the transition from the millennial condition into the eternal state of things and it is a question whether anybody knows what that will be, because flesh and blood will not inherit the kingdom of God. The kingdom of God is a moral thing, and it would seem, in that particular case, to imply the transition from the millennial condition, called the "regeneration", as we have said, into the eternal state of things, for which we are all intended. It is doubtful whether we all understand or whether anyone understands it. What transaction will happen is left somewhat vague in the Scriptures. The millennial condition is a condition set up in order that God should show what He can do with man in the flesh as he is. There is the possibility of sin, yet it is greatly restricted because Satan is bound. But then the transfer will be made from that

state of things into an eternal state of things where there will be no possibility of sin.

F.C.H. What is the force of the expression, "the promise of the Holy Spirit"?

J.T. I think it is just that the Father had promised Him. It is referred to in the endings of the gospels. The apostles or the saints at that time were told to wait for the Spirit. It was as though the Lord would say, Do not do anything without the Spirit; the Spirit is the great thought of the dispensation, and do not begin to do things without Him. It was not indeed that they did not have to do certain things; for they had to select the twelfth apostle; but there was not much to be done until the Spirit should come. Then, of course, there was much done, and the Spirit of God stresses the much that was done, namely, that three thousand people were converted.

Eu.R. Would you say something as to verse 6, "that which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit".

J.T. The word is there is important and shows what is really brought about by this transaction of the Spirit in the believer. There is something that can be designated as spirit. It is important to keep the naming of things in mind. In the beginning of Genesis God named things. It says, He called the light, Day; and He called the expanse, Heavens. Then Adam named things and what we are dealing with now has to be named. We have already alluded to certain Christians and how they deal with the question of new birth. I do not believe they have the right thought, because they think new birth is everything. If a person is converted and has the Spirit, according to them, he is born again; whereas he may be born again and not have the Spirit. They do not know how to distinguish between these two things.

Ques. Is "born of the Spirit" an advance on "born anew"?

J.T. The new birth is set out in the first remarks of the Lord to Nicodemus, but it is not easy to say just what is alluded to in the actual transaction. When we come to the second remark of the Lord, you would expect that He would increase, because it was somewhat a vague matter. Although the Old Testament had spoken of it, it was not known much, so when the Lord refers to it the second time He adds the thought, "born of water and of the Spirit". That helps us to understand that the idea of purification is added to the transaction called new birth.

Rem. Then subsequent to that, this remark, "that which is born of the Spirit is spirit". It is something at least sufficient to be named.

J.T. That is what I was thinking.

P.H.H. Does the Lord carry that forward in the next chapter when He speaks to the woman as to the worship of God. He says, "they who worship him must worship him in spirit". Is it something more substantial now which can distinguish the worship of God in persons?

J.T. Very good. So when Paul comes to the time when he feels it necessary to say what the worship of Christians is, he says, "we are the circumcision, who worship by the Spirit of God, and boast in Christ Jesus, and do not trust in flesh", Philippians 3:3. That is to say, the worship of God implies the entire rejection of the flesh; there is to be no confidence placed in it at all.

A.D.T. Would "born of God", in chapter 1, be a further thought?

J.T. I think it is. Although the Spirit is God, it does not say born of God here. It says "born of water and of the Spirit". But "born of God", I would say, is the full thought of Christianity. Thus, according to chapter 1, everyone born of God has the liberty to take the place of the children of God, and the word "children" there implies the basic relationship which underlies our

sonship from the standpoint of the heavenly calling. This relationship is connected with us down here where we need the care of God, and corresponds with our place of dignity as His sons. Sonship for us gives the full dignity of our position in heaven, for God is said to be bringing many sons to glory. The word children is not used in that connection.

Ques. Had that not already been evidenced by the reception of Christ?

J.T. Yes. "As many as received him". Being born of God is a complete transaction, involving Christianity, and would be inclusive of being born anew.

W.C. Would the woman in chapter 4 be born of God?

J.T. I do not know about that, because she had not received the Spirit. No one received the Spirit until Christ was glorified, as it says, "the Spirit was not yet, because Jesus had not yet been glorified". That brings the thing into definiteness, for the gift of the Spirit is from a glorified Christ.

J.P.H. When she says, in verse 17, "I have not a husband", is that the water operating, "born of water"?

J.T. Very good.

Eu.R. Is the full thought of persons born of God reached experimentally by way of the verse in Romans 7, "I myself ... serve God's law", so that we have sons and children in Romans 8?

J.T. The way is made for Romans 8 by Romans 7. In chapter 8 there are many references to the Spirit of God in the believer, and that brings out the greatness of the Holy Spirit, and of His being in the believer.

P.H.H. Would you say a word on Peter's expression "being born again, ... by the living and abiding word of God", 1 Peter 1:23.

J.T. Peter confirms what John says. He confirms what Paul says too, but especially what John says. Peter says that it is by the incorruptible seed, by the living and abiding word of God. It is the action of the word

of God, implying the revelation of God, and it is apprehended through the mind. The allusion there is to the power that effected the birth of the persons through the presentation to the mind of the incorruptible word of God. I hope the brethren will just think of that and give it its true place. The mind has to be taken into account if we are dealing with the word, and it is a question of God being apprehended through the mind, the result of the word of God acting on the mind of men. If it is a question of the birth of the man, the whole man is involved in the sense of his mind or his intelligence.

Ques. Is that confirmed by what the Lord says in Matthew 13:51 as to the sowing of the word? "Have ye understood all these things?" and, in Mark 4:13 He says, "Do ye not know this parable? and how will ye be acquainted with all the parables?"

J.T. Quite so. But Matthew 13 says that they did understand, for the disciples say, "Yea, Lord", and the Lord did not deny it. Then He proceeds to speak of what a disciple is, "every scribe discipled to the kingdom of the heavens is like a man that is a householder who brings out of his treasure things new and old". He is intelligent as to what he is dealing with. It is not simply what he has objectively, but he has things new and old in his treasure.

A.B. Peter refers to the pure mental milk of the word. Is that the mind of the believer being fed?

J.T. Well, that is good. That is just what was in mind; it is a question of that faculty, the mental part of man. Paul says, "we have the mind of Christ"; that is the idea; it is the thinking faculty of Christ.

Rem. Mr. Darby's note to that verse in Peter says, that 'the word here translated mental has the sense of suited to the rational faculties -- the mind in contrast with the body'.

J.T. We are slack on the point of the mind and especially so at the Lord's supper. The Lord says, that we are to do what He did at the Lord's supper,

for the calling of Me to mind. See note to 1 Corinthians 11:24. That is to show, that the mind has a great place as we sit down to partake of the Lord's supper.

P.H.H. How does the woman in John 4 fit into this picture?

J.T. She fits into it well. The Lord has taken her on and, although weary with His journey, He was pleased to converse with her and to listen to her natural thoughts. We all have these natural thoughts and they unquestionably interfere with spiritual thoughts, but I think she comes into it in that way. The Lord allowed her to give out her experience and thoughts and then He proceeds until He calls her Woman. She is learning and the Lord proceeds to make something of her by His teaching. She had said, "I see that thou art a prophet". As soon as she begins to see things, and discerns that He is a prophet, then the Lord calls her Woman.

F.C.H. It says in verse 5, that the setting of the incident was "near to the land which Jacob gave to his son Joseph". Does not that bring out the thought of the spiritual addition there is in the chapter? Joseph's name means He will add.

J.T. I believe the idea of addition was in this woman, because she left her water-pot. That would not add to her any more, for, when you come to this matter of birth and the living water, our belongings do not add to any of us. The vessel, whatever it may be, even a business, does not add to us, so this woman left it, and went away into the city and said, "Come, see a man who told me all things I had ever done: is not he the Christ?" That was the whole point.

P.L. The Lord using the word woman shows that in His mind she is stripped of her circumstantial environment and stands out according to the work of God that needs no appurtenances.

J.T. Quite so. She left her water-pot; this is recorded for a purpose. Paul, in visiting Troas, had the effects of his work accompanying him, but here the

Lord has not the disciples with Him. They should have been there to give fulness to what He was saying, but they were not there. That brings out the necessity of the brethren being present when the testimony of God is being unfolded. The Lord will use us to add to what He is saying, to bring it out, because, as we have said, it is a question of persons.

E.C.M. Did the Lord take the woman on with a view to securing her as a vessel for the reception of the Spirit?

J.T. Quite so. He took her on at the very outset in view of what He had in mind. He knew all about her, but there had to be this exposure of the number of husbands she had and so forth. We have come to a time in the history of society in which the marriage tie has become weakened and the family damaged. So here the question of husbands comes up, and when she says, "I have no husband", the Lord accredits her with telling the truth. When we come to Christianity, the whole matter as to society and as to men and as to families has to be settled. Thus this woman has to be exposed, and the Lord does not stop in His instruction, until we come to the very topmost thought, and that is that man is to worship God.

P.H.H. Is there a suggestion in the mention of the prophet that God would answer all these questions nowadays by a word in ministry? The woman says, "Sir, I see that thou art a prophet", and she says it as the result of the Lord exposing her. Would you say that all the practical exercises amongst us might find their settlement according to the mind of God, in the meeting for ministry, as it is called?

J.T. Quite so. Then the question is whether we have prophets. The woman definitely distinguishes the Lord as a prophet; she says, "I see that thou art a prophet". If we have them then we will get the solutions of our difficulties.

P.L. Is that the perception that attaches to "let the others judge" in 1 Corinthians 14:29?

J.T. In all these matters dealing with the assembly and its order, and the persons who form it, we are bound to come back to Corinth. God has revived the prophetic meetings. It is supported by the first book of Samuel, and the mention of "the hill of God", 1 Samuel 10:5. That is where the power of God is. In Samuel the hill was in the hands of the Philistines, but it should not have been. The service of the prophet would soon make way for the hill of God. So 1 Corinthians 14 contemplates the whole assembly coming together in one place. No matter how many sub-divisions there may be, when they come together in one place the hill of God is there. It is all that God has in the town or the city, and the prophets will bring out, therefore, what there may be. If there is anything to be solved, there will be light through the prophets.

Ques. Would the fact that Samuel was a judge and established to be a prophet show the intimate link between what is prophetic and what belongs to the legislation that we were speaking about this morning?

J.T. Yes. It says of him that none of his words fell to the ground. You just wonder how much there is in ministry that does not fall to the ground. I believe the idea is that the prophetic word reaches the saints. The point is, that if the saints are listening, and if their consciences are in exercise they will be listening, then, instead of the prophet's words disappearing into thin air or falling to the ground, they will fall into honest and good hearts.

P.L. Would the record of Samuel's death also indicate the choice fruit of the seed he sowed, in Abigail for David?

J.T. Just so. She had an understanding of David and could speak about him as bound up in the bundle of life with Jehovah his God.

E.C.M. Do you connect the idea of preservation with the prophetic ministry? Hosea says, "By a prophet Jehovah brought Israel out of Egypt, and by a prophet was he preserved", Hosea 12:13.

J.T. Quite so.

Eu.R. The Lord designating her woman involves the reaching of a subjective result?

J.T. I think so. Jesus says to her, "Woman, believe me, the hour is coming when ye shall neither in this mountain nor in Jerusalem worship the Father". He addresses her as "woman" as if she was now qualified to be so regarded by herself.

P.H.H. Does the Lord raise the question of His Person in His earlier remark, "If thou knewest the gift of God, and who it is that says to thee, Give me to drink"? Is there a suggestion there that we are to be prepared for the greatness of the Lord in His Person to dominate this position, both as the Giver of the water, and then the Prophet, and then the One who speaks about the service of God?

J.T. That brings up what we have already alluded to in chapter 2. It says there, "Jesus himself did not trust himself to them", but this woman would be trusted. I think she represents the trustworthy quality, because the Lord goes on to speak to her about the greatest things. He speaks about the worship of the Father. He could commit to her even such elevated thoughts as that. I do not believe that the leaders of the national and publicly accredited churches could give you the true thought of worship, yet the Lord speaks about it to this woman and she would understand.

C.O.B. Linking chapters 3 and 4 together, would you say that the operations of the Spirit have in view the worship of God?

J.T. I was thinking that we might come to that in chapter 4. This woman is singled out in the Lord's mind, and in the facts that are mentioned by the Spirit, because it says of her in verse 27, "And upon this came

his disciples"; they now come in. Then it says they "wondered that he spoke with a woman; yet no one said, What seekest thou? or, Why speakest thou with her? The woman then left her waterpot and went away into the city, and says to the men, Come, see a man who told me all things I had ever done: is not he the Christ?" She now comes to the Person. It is what we get in Matthew 1, "the generation of Jesus Christ", for we come there to the idea of the Christ. There are forty-two generations leading us up to that. "The generation of Jesus Christ"; what a process preceded the Christ! Now we come to the idea of the worship of God, and, as we learn from Hebrews, Christ is the Minister of the sanctuary; the worship of God is in His hands. The woman understood and called Him the Christ. She put it that way, as if to say, Is it not really so that He is the Christ?

Ques. Do you think she was using her mind? Was it not a calculation that she had arrived at?

J.T. I think so. She was developing in intelligence.

A.H.G. Would the need for intelligence be pointed out in the Lord's words, "we worship what we know"?

J.T. Just so.

Ques. So that the culmination of new birth is a worshipper?

J.T. I think that is what the passages we have read mean. We have come to the worship of God, and surely that is the main thought now in our times. The evangelisation of men, too, is a very important thing, but I think the service of God is what God is stressing amongst us.

Ques. Have you in mind also the power to take it on, so that the matter is filled out with spiritual substance as the result of this subjective, formative work?

J.T. Quite so. There she is. The Spirit of God singles her out. She left her water-pot and she goes to the men. She does not go to the women to talk about things, but to the men, and the inquiry she makes is:

"Come, see a man who told me all things I had ever done is not he the Christ?"

P.L. So that the great thought of the worship by the Spirit of God in Philippians, is linked on with the greatness of the surrender. Everything that is of man is parted with, the race of Israel, the tribe of Benjamin (see Philippians 3:3 - 7). Is not worship bound up with sacrifice? David said, "Neither will I offer ... unto the Lord ... that which doth cost me nothing", 2 Samuel 24:24.

J.T. Quite so.

P.H.H. Would Obed, the worshipper, coming from Ruth, suggest the true substance arrived at in a subjective way?

J.T. Very good. He is the progenitor of David, who is the sweet psalmist of Israel. The whole matter thus hangs together in the Scriptures.

P.L. Does our power to rise and soar in the spiritual realm lie in our power to part with the natural?

J.T. Quite so.

Ques. Have you not had in mind all through that the worship of God really requires persons who are formed spiritually and who conduct themselves suitably in it? It is not merely taking the matter on by way of creed or doctrine, but being formed inwardly in relation to the God whom we are worshipping.

J.T., Thus Paul says, "we are the circumcision, who worship by the Spirit of God", Philippians 3:3. He emphasises the we, so that we can say we belong to the worshippers.

Ques. Is that not precisely the difference between verse 29 and verse 25? In verse 29 the thing has become substantial, whereas in verse 25 it was, more or less, tradition.

J.T. She says, in verse 25, "I know that Messias is coming". That is what she might have known from

reading the Scriptures; but in verse 29 she says, "Come, see a man who told me all things I had ever done: is not he the Christ?" What is really in mind is the Christ, the Person. He is the great divine Operator and His operations include the service of God, for He is the Minister of the sanctuary.

THE ASSEMBLY AND CHRIST'S RELATION TO IT

Revelation 22:17; Acts 9:1 - 16

J.T. It is of importance to call attention to the fact that the assembly is the nearest of the families of God, to divine Persons. The verse in Revelation points to this, because she is seen joined with the Holy Spirit in saying, "Come". It is a peculiar and important matter that she is so near to divine Persons as to join with One of Them in saying "Come" to Another of the three Persons in the Deity, the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit. The passage read from Acts 9 points to the Lord having to say to the assembly and to the persons forming it. The general fact of His position now is that He has gone into heaven and that, as Mark tells us, He has sat at the right hand of God, which is a position of dignity the Father has conferred on Him. This links with the word in Acts 2:33, "being by the right hand of God exalted ... he hath shed forth this, which ye now see and hear". At the same time, however, He is seen in the Acts and in 1 Corinthians 15 as appearing to Paul. Paul refers to himself in the words "last of all ... he appeared to me also"; the appearing alluding to what we read in Acts 9. Then there are other appearings to him, such as at Corinth and also at Jerusalem. It is therefore thought that we shall get help in looking into these scriptures and seeking to understand how great the assembly's place is. Then how the Lord was active with it, or the members of it, in different ways, but particularly in the corporeal sense, for He actually came to earth in person in relation to Paul and in relation to others too, as we have remarked, but particularly in relation to Paul.

P.H.H. Would the servant with Rebecca at the end of Genesis 24 give a type of the Spirit and the bride together?

J.T. He is seen there typically, and yet it is clear, that it is intended to be as real in its meaning as what we have in the antitype. Rebecca is seen as riding on camels, which points to the power by which the assembly is carried to Christ. Then further we see how the Lord, as typified by Isaac, was occupied, for Isaac was coming from the well called Lahai-roi. Coming from it points to his being active in that sense. Typically he is a man of leisure and free to be occupied with his bride when she comes into view. The first allusion, however, is to the power by which she is carried. Then later he is seen as at liberty and in restfulness and dallying with her. All this has a meaning at the present time as showing how the Lord would take advantage of the first day of the week. He has peculiar liberty among the saints on that day. It is named in Scripture as "the Lord's day". It is the Lord's day, and John says, "I was in the Spirit on the Lord's day". The allusions by the Spirit, in that setting, to the assembly particularly, in Revelation 22:16 point to the Lord's activities, as in referring to Himself He says, "I am the root and offspring of David, the bright and morning star". He says that, and says it in order to affect the assembly, so that immediately we have the answer; "the Spirit and the bride say, Come". It is quite intelligent and intelligible that we should so regard the first day of the week as affording such an opportunity, the bride being mentioned. Earlier in the book of Revelation she is mentioned as the wife, which would refer to her in her occupation with His interests down here. In this particular verse in Revelation 22, she is occupied along with the Spirit, one of the divine Persons, with another divine Person. They are occupied with the coming of the Lord; that surely is something which should command our affections at this present time.

Ques. So that when this moment actually arrives, will it not signalise the close of this dispensation? Have you in mind that what will be fully consummated then may be in our hearts now?

J.T. I am sure that is right. The word in 1 Corinthians 11:26 is, "As often as ye shall eat this bread, and drink the cup, ye announce the death of the Lord, until he come". That is the proper occupation entering into the Lord's supper.

Ques. Has the invitation "Come", the rapture or the appearing in view?

J.T. I would say the appearing. It is a question of what He is coming into. She is occupied, as a wife ought to be, with what He is coming into and not only what He is to her. So we have Paul speaking of those who "love his appearing".

N.K.M. "Until he come". Is that the rapture or the appearing?

J.T. I think the appearing is meant, because it is a question of what the Lord is coming into. The assembly in her wifely character is not only thinking of what she comes into herself, but of what He comes into; the full consummation of the divine thoughts.

Ques. Does the fact that she understands and appreciates the expression, "the root and offspring of David", suggest the greatest measure of intelligence as to His Person?

J.T. They are, of course, the Lord's own words. His being the root of David refers to Deity, and the offspring, to His humanity. She understands that, and He knows that she is capable of understanding it.

Ques. Is it specially through the understanding of Paul's ministry that we come to this thought of our nearness and intimacy with divine Persons?

J.T. I think the Lord is working at that constantly. The real feminine representative of the assembly in John would be Mary Magdalene, and she calls the Lord "Rabboni", meaning that He was her teacher. I believe the importance of teaching runs through John's gospel. The instruction that he affords to us is stressed, in view of the importance of the brethren being taught.

J.P.H. The appearing being in mind in 1 Corinthians 11, what will occur between the rapture and the appearing? It says, "Until he come" in connection with the Supper.

J.T. The interval would have to be worked out in prophecy. We would have to work out the three years and a half which we find in the book of Revelation and in Daniel, and we have to be like Daniel, and understand by books. Perhaps we do not set ourselves to understand enough by books. The words "Come" and "until he come" refer to the general position of the testimony until He comes into His rights. His creative rights are alluded to in Revelation 10:2 - 3 in which we are told that "he set his right foot on the sea, and the left upon the earth, and cried with a loud voice as a lion roars". He will thus assert His authority creatively and, I believe, that is included in the coming of the Lord.

F.C.H. Would not the reference to the "morning star" confirm the thought that it refers to His appearing? It is in view of another day.

J.T. I think that is good. It is "the bright and morning star". Peter says "until the day dawn and the morning star arise in your hearts", 2 Peter 1:19.

W.C. Is there any idea of something in the nature of the Supper being continued by the remnant on the line of Matthew and Mark?

J.T. I do not understand that, although I have heard of it before. Of course, you might say, the expression "until he come" would imply it, but I do not think the Lord's supper belongs to any other family. The Lord says, "This is my body, which is for you".

Ques. The expression "until he come" is hardly a reference to time chronologically, but rather in view of His rights being owned. In the assembly, during the whole time of His absence they should be owned, until He comes personally to take them up?

J.T. That is right, and that is how I understand the place of the woman of worth in the book of Proverbs. "Her husband" it says, "is known in the gates". That is to say He is known through what she is doing and now the Lord is known through what we are doing. It is a poor thing if He is not.

P.H.H. Is it your thought that the close connection between the Spirit and the bride would help to put everything that the assembly has to do with on a very high level?

J.T. That is just the point that is in mind.

P.H.H. Does that mean that the Lord's supper, in itself in its inwardness, is also being elevated in our minds?

J.T. I think it is. The Lord has been stressing the truth of His Supper for well nigh thirty years, and the true thought of it has been coming to light constantly. You might say, almost every Lord's day we get something. Then the truth of the assembly is bound up with it, because the apostle says in 1 Corinthians 11, "When ye come together in assembly". The Lord's supper is thus bound up with the assembly, and to make the Supper the portion of any other family is, I think, confusing.

W.C. I think what you say is clear from the setting of it, that it is the assembly's privilege.

Ques. Do the Lord's words in John 14:3 "I go to prepare you a place ... that where I am ye also may be" show the peculiar place of intimacy that the assembly will have to the divine Persons as over against other families named in heaven and earth?

J.T. I think so. Beginning with verse 15 of John 14 and running right to the end, the Lord has in mind those who form the assembly. So that He says in that passage, "I am coming to you", which enters into the chapter we read.

Ques. Do you regard the Supper as special? You have spoken of Christ being in heaven as the general

position in Christianity, but at the Supper have we liberty to think of Him as near?

J.T. I think it is intended to be that. So the apostle says, "Have ye not then houses for eating and drinking? or do ye despise the assembly of God?" These are words that point to the greatness and glory of the Lord's supper, involving the assembly and no other family.

P.L. You distinguish between His coming, as, in the end of Luke, in relation to localities, when He stood in their midst, and asks them whether they have anything here to eat, from the occasion in John 20 when it says, that He came and stood in the midst? Would the latter view His coming in as from heaven as the ascending Man and bear on the general position, and the upward trend of the service of God. The first in Luke rather bears upon His identification with us in the sojourning character of the assembly in its sorrows and exercises?