2 Timothy 3:8; 2 Kings 18:4; 1 Kings 3:23 - 28; Genesis 2:19 - 25

What enters into these scriptures as the subject for an address is the idea of naming persons and things. I might remark that the first to give a name formally was God. It is indeed a divine prerogative to give names. This prerogative is seen in God Himself, who, as it is said, called their name, that is the name of the man and the woman, Adam, in the day that they were created. It is seen there in God. And then in His representatives later throughout the Scriptures, we have the divine prerogative of name-giving, until we get into the New Testament, in which we find the Lord Jesus, God manifest in flesh, employing this same prerogative in giving names. In a way that is more interesting to us, or should be, than this, for each of us is named by the Lord. So that both now and in the future, our distinction through life shall be expressed in the name given.

We have, indeed, in the beginning of the Acts, the crowd of names. It might be thought that that is a little disorderly or irregular -- a crowd. It is certainly not an assembly thought. But it is remarkably accurate. It is used for it brings out what I am, in that each of those one hundred and twenty persons had a distinction. The fact that they are seen prolifically does not rob them severally of that distinction. And they are counted. So that it becomes very interesting to those of us who are taken up sovereignly, that we shall develop under the hand of the Lord, especially through discipline, what is in the divine mind, so that it may be expressed in each of us. Cases may arise as to persons and of course, alas, there are many -- as far as we can see -- who are under

discipline, whose spiritual distinction is not visible to us.

But in these cases we have to retire, and we can do so restfully, knowing that there will be no discrepancy whatever in result -- that each one will fit as he is designed to fit. How it comes about is another matter, and is inscrutable as far as we are concerned. But the names will all be there, and each will shine in his own glory; "for star differs from star in glory", 1 Corinthians 15:41. We can take that to suggest as to what we should be, dear brethren; that the brilliance and radiance of light should be in us, as the light is the life. The idea of life is that the life is the light. "In him was life, and the life was the light of men". So in each of us the life developed has been the light. And that will radiate and denote the name. For the stars are all named, and so are the saints. The saints are the new creation, and all bears on them -- what each of the saints is to be. All that is very wonderful, and far more than I could touch on now. But, as I said, it is a divine prerogative to give names, and every believer comes under that. The examples we have are only to remind us of the universality of the principle. It could not be otherwise as we think of the saints and how God regards them -- that each should be divinely in order and distinguished by name, not simply accidental, but given divinely, as in the case of Peter.

Well now, what I have in mind is to transfer that thought to ourselves -- as to giving names -- how we are to acquire the way of it. One may say that of me as I am able to name a thing. We will see some propensities in names, and there are many. The natural man has a great many. The Spirit of God has a list of the propensities or the evils of man -- what proceeds out of his heart. The Lord gives a list of about thirteen. The apostle Paul gives about sixteen works of the flesh in Galatians, and about ten descriptions

of wicked men in the letter to Corinth. These are to be tabulated and watched over. One has to discover them in oneself. As one discovers them in oneself, and gives the name proper to each, one has the mastery over it. I do not say the name itself gives the mastery over it, but the Holy Spirit enables you to master it.

Well now, this leads me to the first scripture read -- that is in Timothy. We have two names that only appear in this particular scripture, although they allude to persons that lived many hundreds of years earlier -- Jannes and Jambres. We need not tax ourselves as to how the apostle Paul arrived at these names. He wrote by the Spirit of God. We need not tax ourselves as to how Jude knew that Enoch had prophesied about sinners in our own times. He spoke also by the Spirit of God. The Spirit of God is conversant with every person and thing from the beginning of the creation until now. But then if Paul used these names there surely is some reason -- it is not merely that what he wrote was indited by the Spirit.

The epistle is a peculiar one. It is, you might say, his last will and testament. The saints were in his heart. The truth was in his heart. He was concerned about the truth. He says to Timothy, "the things that thou halt heard of me ... commit thou to faithful men", 2 Timothy 2:2. He was concerned that that should be cared for -- put into the hands of faithful men -- not as a creed. He had in mind that his teaching should be handed down in spirit, as in the hands of faithful men. He was concerned about that. It was his last will and testament. He desired that the precious truth that he had received from the Lord should be handed down to us, not only in letter but in the Spirit. And so he is concerned about it in that way, and in many other things one might cite, in order that the truth might stand, and the structure

of the assembly might stand, as the structure of the assembly of God stands.

Another thing that he stresses is the things that are "in Christ Jesus" -- everything was there. The whole letter is permeated with the thought that what is most precious should be cared for, the things that are "in Christ Jesus" -- the promise of life, for instance, and truth and love. And many other things that I might cite, as "salvation which is in Christ Jesus". All is fixed in that way in infinite security, and so it has come down to us intact. And then, as to the negative side he mentions these two names, Jannes and Jambres. One would inquire as to where he got those names. How his mind travelled back to the Nile! How he would think of those magicians imitating what Aaron did with his rod turning water to blood. How he would think of Pharaoh here.

And then there was the gruesome thing of the Nile being turned into blood, and the poor Egyptians digging around for a little water. That which is for the refreshment of men turned into death -- the mere profession of christianity. How he would feel that!

And as he proceeded to the next plague, the plague of frogs, he would feel that demons were creeping in amongst the saints. How he would be conscious of it as he was there in person in Rome, hearing about the saints throughout the world. The doctrine of demons -- such doctrine as was taught by Hymenaeus and Philetus -- doctrines that eat as doth a gangrene.

And then he comes along and thinks of the plague of gnats. He would see how the plagues of Egypt corresponded with his own times. The third plague referred to what God was doing, I mean doing consistently with Himself. The frogs did not denote what is of God. They denote what is of demons. The river turned into blood denotes death. But when you come to the dust of the earth -- all the dust of Egypt, we are told -- the rod of Moses turned it into

gnats. You may see there a sure representative of life, figurative of the saints. If God takes up a symbol in that way, we shall find that God has done it in wisdom. There is no modification of the third plague. It is simply brought in, and there is no cessation of it here. It is not said to cease like the others.

How all that would come up in the mind of the great servant of God that I am speaking of. He is speaking of the life that is in Christ Jesus. The promise of life before the world was -- fixed in Christ. Men and women are being made to live, in the power of God, in relation to that. How all that would come into his mind. And so, as I said, the dust of Egypt was turned into living creatures, reminding us of how results were made. Adam was made of dust -- but then made to live. And then we read in that same epistle that God has brought through the gospel life and incorruptibility to light. Not only are we made to live in mortal bodies, but incorruptibility means immortality. Life and immortality are brought to light. How great are all these things! This thought of life -- all things made to live in Christ. "Quickened together with him", Colossians 2:13. How the apostle would think of all that.

These two names come into his mind. He understands. He brings down the whole position of the plagues in Egypt to the present time, and he shows that the enemy, in his agents, was acting against the truth of God. These two men Jannes and Jambres are the agents against Moses. So they are today against the people of God -- against the truth. As "Jannes and Jambres withstood Moses, thus these also withstand the truth". Now I speak in this way, dear brethren, of the importance of being able to name things, and to give them the right names.

We are confronted with this wicked opposition resident in these men. As they withstood Moses so these men withstand the truth at the present time. There

they are. These two men existed. They are in the mind of the Spirit of God. They are carried down, and the apostle Paul is used to name them for the first time, so that you may understand the distinction they had as ministers of Satan. He speaks of ministers of Satan in 2 Corinthians 11:13 - 15. Yet they were probably nominally in fellowship at Corinth turned into angels of light. As soon as I can give the name to a thing, I have the mastery.

Well now, I go on to 2 Kings. We read that Hezekiah broke in pieces the brazen serpent -- he called it Nehushtan. As far as I know, we only get it once in Scripture. We get what it means, of course -- a piece of brass. But it refers to something handed down that once was good. What a history it had. And I see it lifted up. The Lord Jesus Himself refers to it.

"As Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, thus must the Son of man be lifted up", John 3:14. The Lord Jesus took the words into His own mouth.

"If ... any man ... beheld the serpent of brass, he lived". What virtue was in that serpent at that time! But has it got the virtue now? No. It never was essentially anything more than a piece of brass. But then God put virtue in it at that time. And faith laid hold of that. It is a type of Christ. Looking at it at that time was looking at Christ. "If a serpent had bitten any man, and he beheld the serpent of brass, he lived", Numbers 21:9. It was the way of life.

The word 'tradition' in itself is not objectionable, but as used in apostate christendom, it is a pernicious thought, and apostate christianity is built up largely on tradition. That is, what is called the writings of the fathers, running on down for several centuries.

And the Apocrypha, too, writings that in themselves may be very spurious -- ones containing things that cannot be used as the foundation of the faith and hence are pernicious. And here was this piece of brass carried down to the days of Hezekiah. And so

it was that a man of faith corresponding with Paul was needed; Hezekiah was a wonderful saint. He had his blemishes, alas, but he is a wonderful saint, and is honoured in that he is able to use this word 'Nehushtan'.

As I am speaking here tonight, I think of the young people. Look around and think of the evils that confront you -- things that have been carried into the teachings of the school from tradition -- or from modernism, that is the opposite to it. And it is for each to be able to say, 'That is that', to tabulate it.

As soon as you do it in faith, you have overcome it.

This is one of the most practical things I can bring before you. You can name a thing for yourself, not borrowing it from others. Hezekiah did not borrow his name, nor did Paul. It was his own spiritual intelligence that the Holy Spirit used. And that is what I am leading to, that you might be able to put a name on it.

'Well', they might say to Hezekiah, 'this thing has been used as an object of address. It has been used as a deity'. And we have such things as that. Suppose I take the Lord's supper, one of the most precious things we have; what has it become? Generally abroad, particularly in Rome, what was once just a symbol of the Lord Jesus, and is yet to those who love Him, has become an object of veneration. Well, as soon as a man gets his eye opened to that, what does he say? 'Open idolatry'. That is what it is. What does a man that has his eye opened say? 'Well', he says, 'that is just apiece of bread'. And that is what Hezekiah means. 'It is just a trifle of brass. With all your incense that is what it is'. Well now, who is able to say that of himself? 'I have seen the thing. I know that that thing has become venerated and worshipped and all it is is a traditional thing turned into idolatry'. We can name it, you see, and as I name it I am delivered from it. I have mastered it.

Well now, I go on to what is more positive, and that is, the assembly viewed as a mother. I suppose the idea of the mother is in the range of each person. Almost every child here has some conception of the mother. I suppose the knowledge of the mother is primary with every person. The mother has to do with us more than any, and a mother's love and a mother's care remain, perhaps, more than any with every person. And so it is that the picture in 1 Kings 3 helps us as to discerning the saints in this light. It is a guide to us. Here are two persons -- two mothers -- and they are contending for a living child. Who is the mother of the child? There is only one man in the whole universe that can tell who the mother of that child is. Thank God for him! He is a type of Christ. He had prayed for wisdom and God greatly honoured that prayer. He says, 'I have heard it. And I gave you wisdom. I greatly honour you because you did not pray for other things'.

And he is tested because of his wisdom. God loves to test us and brings up one test after another. Whether we can name the real thing in the test, brings out where we are, if we have had to do with God. These propensities and traits of evil that I have been speaking of; by the process of elimination, have I been able to tell the evil from the good? Evil is apt to so clothe itself that it will appear at least portionately good, and that is what tests me. "Woe unto them who call evil good, and good evil". They are not able to name things. And so Solomon is tested. And each of us is tested.

These two women are figurative of the saints. Where is the mother? What am I going to call these people? As I look abroad in Christendom today, I see how many sects there are. Do I really feel how incongruous it is? What is my response now the thing is there before me? Can I put a name on these?

That is what comes out. Where is the child? A living child, not a dead one. This woman is standing there and says, 'That is my son'. And the other one says, 'No, that is my son'. And the king says, "Bring me a sword". Now, dear friends, the sword is the word of God. It penetrates, according to the description we have of it, "piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart". I am in the presence of the king, of Christ, and he says, "Bring me a sword".

He is going to use it. If the living child is to be cut in two, the mother says, 'Oh no! That cannot be'. She yearned for her child. That is what to look for, genuine affection for the people of God. Look for loyalty to Christ, of course, but love for one another. "By this shall all know that ye are disciples of mine, if ye have love amongst yourselves", John 13:35. Look for that.

Here, you see, it is like a company of Christians. They go after the child. They bring them up on the manna. For they "all ate the same spiritual food, and all drank the same spiritual drink, for they drank of a spiritual rock which followed them: (now the rock was the Christ; )" 1 Corinthians 10:3, 4. One would love to speak of it to every Christian in the world. Find the mother; to be able to put this name on the saints viewed in that light. And thus the woman that says, 'Cut the child in two', represents professing Christianity. She was heartless. She is not the mother of the child. See how she is to go. She is to leave that public position with that stamp upon her. She is not a true mother. Whereas the other has disclosed her true heart. Like the Lord Jesus and like the apostle Paul, we yearn for our brethren. Well now, that is assembly truth, as presented to us in Galatians. Sarah is the type of it. She is the true mother of the child. Jerusalem above is our

mother. I think now of the young. The saints love you as a young christian, and would seek to nurture you, and bring you up in the assembly for the Lord's pleasure.

Well now, I pass on to the last scripture read in Genesis 2, so that I may bring out this position more clearly. We read that He "brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them". Think of the wonderful simplicity of it. He took a sheep and brought it before Adam. Now what has He got in His mind? "To see what he would call them".

That is, He would have delight in the process. Now we come to the older brothers and sisters here, developed christians. The figure applies to us who are more experienced. God knows how to test us when we are old as when we are young. Now there he is.

It is some movement of life. It is for me to see that movement of life and name it. And God has pleasure in the process. I have often thought of the history of heaven. What history goes on day and night in heaven. Each of us makes history. As God brings a creature to Adam, history is being made. "To see what he would call them". What pleasure it would give to God to see the intelligence of His wonderful handiwork in man, to see the intelligence he had.

I cannot say how long it took to name all those animals.

Sometimes we speak about Numbers 7 where the twelve princes of Israel offered. Each had his day.

What history was made in those twelve days! Each day was filled with one of those princes. Heaven was delighted with it. The beautiful offerings corresponded with Christ in a typical way. Well now, how long did it take for all these creatures to come before Adam? You cannot say. But what delight it brought to God. He was seeing, working out in that creature, the wonderful intelligence He had put there. God says, 'How pleasing that is to Me'. Adam was

able to name a creature according to the movements of life. Whatever Adam called a creature, that was its name. God was so pleased with the process.

And finally, to come to see the assembly in that wonderful chapter, that is what I am leading up to, to be able to see the assembly, not only as the mother, but as the bride of Christ, to see it in its movements. And so God brought her to Adam. It says, "And Jehovah Elohim built the rib that he had taken from Man into a woman". The word 'built' is used for the first time. What a time it must have been to Jehovah as He brought this creature to man. Well now, he says to Jehovah, "This time it is bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh: this shall be called Woman, because this was taken out of a man".

You see, brethren, this is the top stone. We are called upon to name a thing in the sublimest character.

We should be able to detect and name these traits of Christ in the saints, the traits of Christ worked out femininely in the saints. Adam says, "she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man".

Now that is the end of what I had to say. I just wanted to lead you on to spiritual refinement, as it says, "the spiritual discerns all things" (1 Corinthians 2:15), that you might see the reflection of Christ in the slightest way. "The spiritual discerns all things", as Adam discerned himself in the woman. As we read the epistles to the Corinthians and Ephesians, we shall acquire the habit of discerning these traits in the Lord's people, the body of Christ as seen in the universe of God.

THE LORD'S SERVICES IN THE ASSEMBLY

John 6:67 - 69; John 13:8; John 14:5 - 10; John 17:6,26

J.T. These scriptures indicate how, as believers, we come to know the Lord in His services in the assembly, in His relations to the Father. In the types, Israel had to come to the knowledge of the Lord as priest. The first scripture we read refers to priesthood. Holiness, at least typically, entered peculiarly into this office. So Peter, in our scripture, chapter 6, says, "we have believed and known that thou art the holy one of God". They had believed. His disciples believed in Him, we are told, as He manifested forth His glory, but they came gradually to see Him in His varied glories and offices. So in saying that they had believed and known that He was the Holy One of God, they had the knowledge of Him which we may call basic as regards the service of God. The word was in them in that light. The Lord spoke in chapter 14 of their knowing Him when the Spirit should come, and that He was in the Father, and they were in Him and He in them. He comes into their knowledge of Him on this line, as believing and knowing by experience. The gospels provide examples of persons who know who He is in this sense, such as John the baptist, the woman of Samaria, and now Peter. In John the baptist, He was known as sacrificial, as the Lamb of God; in the woman of Samaria, as the Christ, and here He is spoken of as having been believed on and known to be the Holy One of God, evidently acquiring place in the disciples in this way. Paul spoke of Christ being among us, or in us, morally His place in the assembly which leads to the Minister of the sanctuary and indeed as exercising every office in the assembly, for indeed His varied glories are to Shine, as we know, and to be responded to also in a

reciprocal way in the saints, as He is known amongst us. And then in chapter 13 (Peter again speaking, but unadvisedly), the Lord reminds us in His answer to Peter that we can only have part with Him, not simply as washed, but as He washes us. That is, the matter must be His. Elsewhere, we wash ourselves. He washes us from our sins, too, but here it is not simply that we are washed, but that He does it, and if He does not there is no possibility of having part with Him. This would remind us that in the assembly He must have to say to everything, and then as to the Father, we should question Him. He instructs us in His answers as to how we are to apprehend the Father. That is, He is to be apprehended, but He is to be apprehended in His fulness. No one hath seen Him as to His absolute Being, but He is to be apprehended in His fulness, so that it is what is in Christ. "He that hath seen me hath seen the Father", He says. So that we get into our minds who we are speaking of when we are speaking of the Father. There is some concrete report. He is invisible as God is, but still there are the features that get into our minds that we know what we are saying and to whom we are saying it, when we are speaking to the Father.

And then finally, in chapter 17, the Lord is seen as High Priest. Although John does not give these official titles, yet we can see, by the service He renders, what He says when speaking to His Father, how the divine service is carried on, how the Minister of the sanctuary carries on the service and what place the saints have in it, carried along in the ministry in the teaching of this book, carried along to be alongside the Lord in His speaking to the Father, in which speaking, or we might say, prayer, He calls His disciples men whom the Father gives Him. So that He is manifesting His name to them in verse 6, and in verse 26, "I have made known to them thy name,

and will make it known; that the love with which thou hast loved me may be in them and I in them". So that we go on this line, into the love in its greatest position, that is in the love the Father has for the Son.

A.R. Would you say what is involved in the expression "the holy one of God" as in the first portion?

J.T. I think it underlies the service of God in the sanctuary. It underlies the Lord's official place as Priest. The disciples came to apprehend Him in this light. It is remarkable that it comes out when many were going away, and it reminds us of the needs of acquiring a knowledge of Christ, an experimental knowledge, otherwise we shall go away.

H.B. He being in us in this character, does that mean that we are seeking on sanctuary lines, seeking on the way of getting into a sphere that suits us, and where we are in direct first-hand touch with Him?

J.T. You are fixed. You are not going away. There is no one to go to.

Ques. Does Peter get his first glimpse of the knowledge of the Lord in Luke 5"Depart from me, for I am a sinful man, Lord", Luke presenting Him as "the holy thing also which shall be born shall be called Son of God" (Luke 1:35); and immediately after the Lord indicates service for him?

J.T. Well, that is very good. The presence of holiness is there. He felt the presence of holiness, and he was sinful, not only a sinner but sinful. As you say, Luke begins with the thought of holiness, essential holiness -- the Holy Thing. That is essential holiness which can be said of no other Babe. Even the demons recognised it, but in Peter's answer here, it is an experimental matter. It is not simply that he got a revelation as in Matthew 16, but it is experimental, and therefore, within the range of all of us.

T.T. In the earlier part of John 6, the Lord speaks about being taught of God, and says, "No one can

come to me except the Father who has sent me draw him". Is there a connection between the two?

J.T. The chapter is profound in that way. It is a chapter which requires more attention than any for the understanding of it. The Lord says, for instance, "This is the work of God, that ye believe on him whom he has sent". So that we proceed in the epistles. We become experimental in our knowledge of the Lord. That is, He becomes, as it were, in us. We are told in Romans 8 "if Christ be in you" and in Colossians, "Christ in you the hope of glory". I believe John builds up that line of truth.

So that as to John the baptist, Christ is in him, and so right along he gives the varied features of Christ's glory in the way it is apprehended, for the names He gets are nearly all by those who apprehend Him, as for instance, by Nathanael.

G.H.C. Is the apprehension of Him connected with the way He is presented in this chapter, as the principle of life?

J.T. It is, because Peter says, "Thou hast words of life eternal". That is the first thing he mentions the words meaning that the truth or the subject of eternal life is opened up to us and made intelligible. There is instruction as to it in detail and that is necessary, too, as regards our essential position because life is essential. It is the living that praise God, as Hezekiah says. But then Peter adds here, "the holy one of God". "The holy one of God" would imply the service of God.

A.G. Do you suggest that Matthew 16 is special, and this chapter is normal?

J.T. This is normal. It is presented as normal, although the Lord addresses the twelve. It is presented as the normal outcome of what is experienced. He does not ask what they were saying about Him, but He challenges them as to whether they are going away, so that it becomes very practical. The knowledge

of Christ as Peter speaks of it here is essential to our being held in the right position.

C.E.W. You spoke of the apprehension of Himself in earlier chapters. Do you think that the character of the service here is more in relation to the assembly?

J.T. I think the basis is laid in Peter's soul for the service of God, that is from this point. We might take up the whole typical teaching, for the types are full of the teaching relative to the service of God. It is very remarkable as you look into the types, take Exodus. The great bearing of Exodus is the service of God. "Let my son go, that he may serve me". That is in chapter 4. And then we have in chapter 25 how God shall dwell among His people, and be served amongst them. So that we can understand how instruction laid in Peter's soul would fit him for the service of God, to take it up as we have seen in the book of Exodus, and then the book of Leviticus -- priestly service. It is the great subject for the moment, I believe, that the Lord is keeping before us, and we are challenged here as to whether we are going away. What is holding us? It is the vital knowledge of Christ, first as the One who has the words of eternal life, and then the Holy One of God.

R.McA. Do you think the Lord felt keenly for those who went away?

J.T. He did. It is from that time, many of His disciples went away, and were walking no more with Him. And then He says to the twelve, "Will ye also go away?" And then Peter's reply. These are the things, these are the initial features, which would hold the saints. "Lord, to whom shall we go?" Who would tell you about eternal life? And then as regards God and our service, who could tell us anything about it? Where can you get it in all the systems that man has made up? They have not a

thought for the service of God. There must be the Holy One of God for the service of God.

W.H. Does the Lord connect the thought of being in them as known with the idea of eating His flesh and drinking His blood? He says, that he who does So "dwells in me and I in him".

J.T. That is good. It confirms what we are saying as to this chapter.

Rem. So that would be a matter of what enters into the constitution of the individual.

J.T. That is right. That is the word, 'the constitution', because this is not an immediate revelation. It is something we have known by experience. We have believed and known. We believe much that we cannot say we have known, but to say that I have known, I mean that I have had experience of the thing. I have proved it.

Rem. So this is a word for the Lord's own heart as well as a test to the disciples.

J.T. I think that is right. I think it must have been very refreshing to Him, to have an answer like this, and so always the Lord loves to hear us tell what we think of Him -- what would hold us to it. We have vital knowledge of Christ; we have nowhere else to go. Take all the things there are one by one, and where can you go? If you are a spiritual person, if you are a true believer in Christ, where can you go?

Rem. In chapter 17, the Lord says, "the words which thou hast given me I have given them".

Would you connect these words with words of eternal life?

J.T. That is beyond this. Peter said the Lord had them. He does not imply that the disciples had them. They no doubt understood, but this is the experience of His teaching, listening to what He is saying and so what He was saying were words not simply that would teach them, but that one could have them.

Ques. Is it this knowledge that distinguishes the other disciples from Judas? He was chosen as much as they were, was he not?

J.T. The Lord says so -- a very solemn challenge, because if He is the Holy One of God, we will be searched out. Being in the outward position is not enough. Where He is confessed in this way, He could not let Judas off -- not simply that he had a demon, but he was a devil, showing what may be amongst the brethren, and the Lord exposes it.

W.H. As eating His flesh you would be morally apart from all that the flesh would live in, and drinking His blood would bring you into touch with all that His love would reveal. So that love would be your portion.

J.T. Quite so. The chapter is very profound. It is the Son of God, and the Son of man come down from heaven. It is a question of the life of the world. It is a question of life. No doubt the teaching was being received by him and others. The disciples have reached something that holds them permanently with the Lord, and speaking of a person amongst them who is a devil, he can be dealt with without causing damage. There is something that holds them.

G.D. It would call our attention to the great feature of holiness.

J.T. Well, that is what I was remarking, as underlying the service in the sanctuary. Holiness becomes us for ever. So that we have in Christ the Holy One of God. He is thus Minister of the sanctuary, that is, One available for service who is qualified for all that relates to the sanctuary.

G.D. Is that what was lacking with the two sons of Aaron, not understanding the holiness of the position in their service?

J.T. They offered strange fire and Judas would do that, too.

H.B. Is there the side in which we are indispensable

to Him in the filling out of the service of God?

J.T. That is what comes in here, I think. The thought of it comes in amongst the twelve. It must be remembered that all that He unfolded was in relation to the twelve, especially the Lord's supper.

As far as the records go, only twelve were present. What is in mind in that is that what the Lord intended to inaugurate there would be established on a reliable testimony, and the thought of the sanctuary comes in here and the Lord must say there is a devil. He is utterly incompatible with the sanctuary. Anything of that nature must be dealt with. If we go to the types, of course, this is all opened up to us.

H.B. It is said of Mary Magdalene, that seven demons went out of her. Does that in any way touch the idea?

J.T. It would, indeed. She would be thus consecrated material for the assembly.

G.H.C. This thought of Minister of the sanctuary -- is it known in a peculiar way when the saints are together in assembly?

J.T. That is what I was thinking of, that we might see first as to how each of us comes into it, into the knowledge of Christ in this direction. Many of us may sit down in assembly, and have no personal knowledge; we have to rely on the brethren who have. Whereas the thought here is that the believer comes into personal knowledge of Christ in this character. We have believed and known, Peter says; so that we understand. We sit down in assembly, we look round when we go in, and we take charge.

G.H.C. Is this a sign of His service? Do you think we have not paid sufficient heed to His service in this regard?

J.T. I think it is a question to each person, coming to know the Lord as Peter knew Him.

T.T. They said, "Is not this Jesus, the son of Joseph, whose father and mother we have known?"

But there was nothing in that that was really in the service of God.

J.T. That is a good contrast. That could never come into fellowship, as we say. It is this personal knowledge that qualifies us for the assembly. Peter could have said many other things at this juncture. He does, but what he says here we may be sure is what was needed, what ends in the instruction.

F.I. Does this personal knowledge of the Lord come to us before we come to the Supper, or while we are at the Supper?

J.T. I think it is a christian experience that we ought to acquire as we are converted. It is the essence of the gospel, that He is raised from the dead, that He is "declared to be the Son of God with power, according to the spirit of holiness, by the resurrection from the dead", Romans 1:4. It seems it is something that can be acquired by persons to whom the gospel comes. The element of holiness comes with the gospel. I mean, it is presented divinely in the gospel. The Spirit works it in us. We come together, as I understand, to sit down in assembly, as knowing Christ in this way. He is my Saviour, of course, and many other things, Mediator of the covenant, but He is the Holy One of God, as basic, and it works out in many glories in Christ. What else have you to say about that?

F.I. Well, I have not much else to say. I just wanted help. As you have in view the thought of the service of God, I take it that is carried on as being in assembly in relation to the Supper. You do not look at it as apart from that. Where do we gather up the thought as to the Minister of the sanctuary, or where are we made suitable to take it on?

J.T. I think the Lord's supper is the occasion of this, the introduction to the service of God as in assembly, and what is more, is that each believer is to acquire the knowledge of the Holy One of God. It

is a basic thought really as to the service of God. He is the Holy One of God, He is looked on as God's in this light. He will look after man in the assembly, in the sanctuary as God while He is Minister in it.

F.W. They did not answer each one for themselves, but Peter answers for all, as though the assembly was involved in that matter.

J.T. Yes. In the Lord remarking about Judas, it is a very small but searching matter, and as in assembly service, there is the possibility of a person like this, and the Lord could not let Judas off when He is confessed as the Holy One of God; He could not let Judas off. He must expose him, for He is in service as the Minister of the sanctuary to expose any evil that may be. So we must, therefore, see that there is no possibility to stay being exposed in the presence of the Holy One of God.

H.R. Is that after He is confessed as the Holy One of God that makes room for Him to take up this service as Minister of the sanctuary?

J.T. He is known to be that. The point is to be that He is known among us. He is in us, as the Holy One of God. And Peter says, "we have believed and known". It is evidently what is known amongst them. You can understand the apostles talking to one another, and the truth would develop in their minds in that way. Peter must have been conversant with the others in saying that we have believed and known.

H.R. I would like to ask in regard of John 21. Peter says to the Lord, "thou knowest all things; thou knowest that I am attached to thee". It was both conscious knowledge and objective knowledge there. What would this knowledge be that you refer to now?

J.T. I cannot really tell you the original word, but I think it is 'conscious'. Peter uses the word for 'conscious' in John 21, until he finishes the last

reference, meaning that the Lord could see in him some objective evidence that he loved Him.

H.R. So that one might have conscious knowledge and yet be possessed of a demon.

J.T. I do not think Judas is included in this at all. He was there. The Lord would not let him off, he would confess to all these things, and no doubt did eventually. What else could he? He was unreal, and if the Lord is acknowledged as the Holy One of God, in effect this is what He says, Judas must be spoken to, and now is the time to do it.

Rem. As to what we said earlier, not one of you has a devil, but one of you is a devil. It is a question of what he was essentially.

J.T. That is right. Quite so.

Rem. He did not name him. The disciples named him. They knew from what the Lord said.

J.T. Yes. He spoke of Judas the son of Simon, Iscariote, that is, the evangelist tells us that. It is as He says later, "one of you shall betray me". It is most important, that as He is the Holy One of God, there must be exposure if He is acknowledged.

Rem. I suppose when you come to John 17, Judas is not there. You have things operating in the holiest.

J.T. I think so, He is speaking to His Father, and what I think morally follows what we have in chapter 6, is the Lord's answer to Peter's comment in chapter 13 as to the Lord's service in washing his feet -- as the Holy One of God, He must have charge. It must be His matter, and the Lord must have His say as to the whole position, and we may as well confess that. This chapter exposes Judas. He is forced out. He is named as a devil in chapter 6, but he is forced out in chapter 13, and as to that the Lord says, "ye are clean, but not all" (verse 10). The Lord must do it. He will see to it that what is suitable is there.

Ques. Do you think that apart from the experimental knowledge of the Holy One of God, the ringleader might be exposed as seeking to take part in the service of God?

J.T. He will be. It will come out. The point is it is where Christ is owned as the Holy One of God, where He is recognised.

Ques. Would His character as the Holy One of God be set forth in chapter 1 of Revelation, when He spoke in the midst of the seven candlesticks?

J.T. Well, it comes out, what He is as the Holy One of God. It is manifested, especially dealing with Thyatira. It would correspond with Judas. In spite of the profundity of ecclesiastical claims, the Lord is discerning all that is there. "I have against thee that thou permittest the woman Jezebel", and He tells the church what He had done with her. The worst kind of thing may be allowed in systems where the Holy One of God is not recognised. It is the presence of the Holy One of God, recognised, which is the guarantee of the exposure of the demons.

T.T. Does the Lord carry on this service personally in washing, or has it been delegated now?

J.T. It is delegated here. In the passage we have read, they were to wash one another's feet, but He is not putting it into the hands of the brethren. He does not specify that they must do it. He sets an example, which they should carry on, but His first reference is that "if I wash thee not, thou halt no part with me". That is a great fact set out in the beginning of His subject, yet it gets the truth into our souls that the Lord must have the first and last word as to the assembly, as to having part with Him.

H.B. Does this mean that we necessarily need our feet washed in taking part in the assembly?

J.T. We may think they are washed, and the Lord reminds us, 'if I do not do it it is not done'. That is, 'if I do not do it, you can have no part

with Me'. You are drawn into the sense of responsibility of bringing the Lord into it. He must be recognised.

Ques. Does the thought of "part with me" relate to service?

J.T. It relates to what follows in the following chapters. I think it is in the sanctuary as with the Father. All these chapters are to lead us up to chapter 17, in which we get a concrete example of His service inside. It is prayer, of course, but still you can see how service is carried on. It is carried on by Him in our midst.

W.H. Would the feet-washing involve that the service as Minister of the sanctuary is to be carried on in freshness amongst the saints, in contrast to the formal thing that obtains in christendom today?

J.T. I think so, and even if it be a saint that does it, you realise that the Lord has done it. I may be qualified to wash the saints' feet, but the person whose feet are washed has to see to it that it is the Lord. It must be the Lord that does it.

F.I. The doing of the service, if rightly done, would leave that sense in the soul, if done by the Lord?

J.T. And so that principle runs through the assembly. He is doing it.

Ques. Do you mean that in that connection the soul is definitely to be in contact with the Lord.

J.T. Definite relations with the Lord, whether brethren do it or not, it is the Lord who is doing it. After all, even the ministry is the Lord's or nothing. If it is not of the Lord, it is nothing.

Ques. Would you say the service of feet-washing discovers Judas?

J.T. It is remarkable it comes out in this chapter, and he is forced out.

Ques. What is the thought of having "part with me"?

J.T. That is what we have in the assembly as

recognising the Lord in our midst, as the Minister of the sanctuary, we have part with Him. I think that is what is in mind. John does not use the word 'sanctuary' or 'assembly', either, but we can see that is what is meant, especially in the last days when you do not want to be using official terms. Therefore, if a brother is serving thus, it is not he only, but the Lord is in it, because that is what makes it effective.

G.H.C. In the verse you read, it is a deliberate move of the Lord towards Peter. "He comes therefore". You are speaking of the Lord calling attention to the service of God at the present moment. Do you think it is deliberate in that way, that the saints should be helped to have part with Him in this great service?

J.T. It is. We can see that in view of the assembly all this precedes. It is not simply what we have been in assembly, but what we take there. That is the state suitable. So that the Lord has us as suitable, and can proceed in His service, which is I think covered in the term "part with me". What can be greater or more blessed than having part with Jesus as He carries on the service before God?

T.T. Would it be accomplished by opening the way for the Father's name?

J.T. That is the next thing. Chapter 14 is to bring us into some little apprehension of what we see when we see the Father we are addressing -- "No one has seen God at any time; the only-begotten Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him". Well now, the voice from heaven finally was to announce the Son, but then that is only the voice, and of course, it is the voice, but we need more than a voice to grasp in our minds the idea of the Father. We see that He is the Father. The declaration of the Father does not depend on the death of Christ. He does not, therefore, enter into the covenant. Many

have thought about that as to whether the Father may be connected with the new covenant, but the new covenant is a matter of the people, of course. The revelation of the Father does not depend on that. There was no death in the revelation of the Father. The revelation of the Father refers to His relations with Christ before He died. His death was not necessary for that. His death was necessary for the covenant. The covenant is not between the Father and His children. It is between God and His people, and it is effected through death, not through the answer from heaven.

Rem. So that "he that hath seen me hath seen the Father" is proof that it is prior to and independent of His death.

J.T. Quite so. Here what the Lord means in His personally calling attention to the Father, is that the Father is characteristically there. He was in Christ personally, and He was there characteristically, so as to be apprehended. "He that hath seen me hath seen the Father". So that there is a great apprehension of the Father in His characteristics.

W.H. The Lord refers to the works that He did and the words which He spoke, as being the Father's words and works. Would that be what you mean as characteristic?

J.T. Quite so. Jesus is not the Father, but He is a divine Person, and so great enough to personify the Person, to impersonate Him, as it were, as the Spirit may impersonate the Father or the Son now.

G.H.C. In the previous chapter He speaks about departing out of the world to go to the Father, and just after He speaks about coming out from God, and going back to God. Would you help us as to that?

J.T. The passage shows what is in mind in this chapter. He is going to the Father. He is going to God. He puts the two together in chapter 20, saying, "I ascend to my Father and your Father, and to my

God and your God", and we are His brethren, and God comes in after He is mentioned by Him, after the Father, which would, I suppose, mean God as He was known by Jesus. Not the covenant God, more than that. I am true to that, of course, but more than that. God is known of Christ, Christ's God.

G.H.C. Is 'God' in the way you are speaking of it, a wider thought?

J.T. It is a wider thought than the name 'Father'. The scripture which supports that exactly is that the Father judges no one. God must be a wider thought in that sense. The Father is a name in family relationship, and employed to indicate the character of our dispensation. It is God known in that way, not the God who judges, but God in grace, but then we have to come to the family thought as to ourselves. We are not called sons of God in John at all. It is either "His Father", or "The Father" throughout in it. We come to chapter 20, and then it is "my Father and your Father, and to my God and your God"; and then you say, what about the Father in Matthew? We have saints called the sons of their Father in Matthew, and they are directed to speak to Him as their Father which is in heaven, but I think it is simply the relation the Father has entered into in Christ, and the disciples were brought into that in a provisional way. Indeed, the term 'Father' is applied to Jehovah in the Old Testament. He is said to be "The everlasting Father" in the prophet; Isaiah 9:6. All that is short of what we have in John 20. John 20 is what applies specially to the saints as forming the assembly.

W.H. How far then do you carry the thought of Christ as being the Minister of the sanctuary? Would that go the length of John 20?

J.T. I think so. Of course, we come to the family thought, God being Father, and the Son in the midst, and we as sons. The sanctuary is a relative thought,

and shutting out what is unholy. The service goes on in John 20. It is the Lord in the midst. It is Christ known in us, as it were, but I think chapter 17 gives us the clue, because the Lord having said these things, lifts up His eyes to heaven and says, "Father". You hear Him speaking to His Father. The chapter gives understanding of what the sanctuary is in that sense, the Son speaks to His Father, and in the attitude, in the sense of prayer, in thanksgiving.

Ques. Would 'the Holy One' have reference to where there is unholiness?

J.T. That is the thought, and the sanctuary has the same thought. If we can follow the Lord along these chapters, we shall come to the thought of assembly service, where He is with us. He is on our side, and carrying on towards the Father. In Matthew we have the words, "I praise thee, Father", and in Luke, too. We have in Luke distinctly, that the Lord at that time rejoiced in spirit, showing what may happen amongst us as in assembly, and in chapter 17 we have an extended prayer to the Father.

H.B. In the last clause of verse 6 it says, "They were thine, and thou gavest them me, and they have kept thy word". I was thinking of "thy word".

Would that be sonship as proper to His word?

J.T. The Father's word, that they have kept.

The Lord gives them credit for keeping it. He calls them 'men', which is to be noted. It is the men, and then He speaks of having manifested the Father's name to them, "and they have kept thy word. Now they have known that all things that thou hast given me are of thee; for the words which thou halt given me I have given them, and they have received them, and have known truly that I came out from thee, and have believed that thou sentest me". Well, you can see how they are regarded in His mind. And then He asks concerning them, because the word 'demands' here alludes to that. He can speak to His Father

familiarly. It is 'demands'. And He says, "I am glorified in them", and then He says, "Holy Father, keep them in thy name, ..." and it says, further down, "Sanctify them by the truth: thy word is truth. As thou hast sent me into the world, I also have sent them into the world; and I sanctify myself for them, that they also may be sanctified by truth". You can see how His thoughts are that we are His companions, and fit to be His companions, not only according to eternal counsel, but according to actual forms.

H.B. That is what I had in mind in connection with the word being in the singular; the same in verse 17, "thy word is truth".

J.T. But then you see sonship is in the mind of the Father. He says in verse 22, "And the glory which thou hast given me I have given them". There I think you come to the idea of sonship. It is the glory; it is not simply the word of the Father.

T.T. Would keeping the word be a proof of affection -- responsive to the word of the Father?

J.T. Well, it would -- intelligent affection, too. The word implies the Father's mind. I cannot keep the word except I understand it.

Ques. Is it your thought then that it would not only be an appropriation of Him in the light of Minister of the sanctuary, but that there should be a suitability to Him as such?

J.T. That is what this prayer is for, that the Lord might have us altogether with Him, as suitable, and He says, "the glory which thou hast given me I have given them". And then finally, "I have made known to them thy name, and will make it known". Now that is a different word from the word 'manifest' in verse 6. It is a deeper word, I think. His name is made known -- that is, effectively made known, and it is through Him. The word could be preached, "... that the love with which thou hast loved me may be in them and I in them". So that the Lord is

amongst us in this exalted way, as the Father hath loved Him. It is not covenant love. It is the Father's love in our hearts.

Ques. Is that according to this, the Father, that we are the sons of God?

J.T. John never calls us 'sons of God' except in the book of Revelation. He calls us children. 'Sons' is what we are towards God. 'Children' is what we are here in His care in testimony. "Now are we children of God", 1 John 3:2.

G.H.C. It says, not only the Father's love in them, but "I in them". Would you say a little as to that?

J.T. Well, I think He is in us on that basis, on the basis of covenant love, in that we need to give place to Him, but it is a more excellent position. He is in us as having the Father's love in us. It is a question of the kind of love. "The love with which thou hast loved me", it says.

Ques. Am I right in thinking chapter 17 views the cross of our Lord as past, and not as we read it, thinking that it was on this side of the cross? It is in view of the Lord as Priest in the assembly, having gone on high, and for us, bearing up His people before the Father.

J.T. Yes, I think that is right. He is bearing up His people here. The point is now to bring out what He is in the assembly -- how He serves in the assembly, and how we have part with Him in the assembly -- a most exalted thought, that we have the Father's love in our hearts, that is the Father's love for the Son"the love with which thou hast loved me", the love wherewith He loved the Son, that we have in our hearts, that we know how to love the Son as the Father loved Him. So that we are on a different platform as He associates us with the Father, and it has to become true of us, having made known to us the Father's name. It is not simply manifested, but

"made known". It is a fact. It is known in our souls, the Father's name.

F.I. That being so, that the Father's name is made known in our souls by the Minister of the sanctuary, does that fit us to pass over into the presence of the Father?

J.T. I think so. We are now qualified. It would be, I suppose, our enjoyment in heaven, that we love as the Father loves.

F.I. So that as we associate with the Lord in the presence of the Father, you do not view Him there as the Minister of the sanctuary.

J.T. Well, He is seen thus speaking here as the Son. He says "Father". The Minister of the sanctuary is here, because we still have to do with evil here below. The idea of a sanctuary will drop in eternity. There is no evil to be against. It is just the Father and sons.

THE HOLY SPIRIT IN THE FIRST EPISTLE OF JOHN

1 John 2:20, 27; 1 John 3:24; 1 John 4:1, 2,13; 1 John 5:6 - 8

J.T. It will be noticed in each of these scriptures that the Spirit of God is largely concerned that we might know -- first that we might be independent of man as regards the antichrist and the many antichrists spoken of in chapter 2; then in the end of chapter 3 as regards God abiding in us, and that we might know the spirits that are current, for evil teaching is not simply by men, but it is wicked spirits using them; then again we have the thought of knowing that we abide in God and He in us, by the Spirit; and finally the testimony of the Spirit as to the water and the blood, that is, the death of Christ. A christian should be intelligent as to all these things; the end throughout the epistle is that things are known; it finishes by saying, "We know that we are of God, and the whole world lies in the wicked one. And we know that the Son of God has come, and has given us an understanding that we should know him that is true; and we are in him that is true, in his Son Jesus Christ". The first two scriptures, as will be observed, are addressed to little children; the second at the end of chapter 3 and beginning of chapter 4 is addressed to the saints as a whole, viewed as the family of God, and so is the passage in chapter 5. So that our first remarks would bear on the young amongst us, exposed to the spirit of antichrist in the schools, and current literature. The Spirit is spoken of in this chapter under the appellation of the 'unction' or 'anointing'. In verse 20 we have an unction from the Holy One, and know all things, and then verse 27 says that "the unction which ye have received from him abides in

you, and ye have not need that any one should teach you; but as the same unction teaches you as to all things, and is true and is not a lie, and even as it has taught you, ye shall abide in him".

J.H.B. Would you open out what the word 'unction' implies?

J.T. It seems to be the Spirit viewed in this particular setting, introduced as "the unction from the holy one", "the holy one" alluding to the Spirit, not so much to call attention to Him personally, but in a certain way, as teaching the young. It is "from" Him, "from the holy one" -- without stressing the personality of the Spirit; it appeals to us as to something already known, rendering us independent; it is by Him that we know all things.

Ques. Would it be seen in principle in the movement of the man in John 9?

J.T. That is a good illustration of it. Of course he had not the Spirit, but that is the principle, as you say. It developed in a wonderful way into knowledge, so that he was superior to the Pharisees in that sense; he showed himself to be intelligent, as having learned more than they did. Just having received light from the Lord, having had his eyes opened, he used his knowledge in a seemly and courageous way. When he was spoken to by his neighbours, he told them the historical facts, but when he was spoken to by the Pharisees, it was what was then present "now I see". They did not see. That, according to the Lord's word at the end of the chapter, brought out the whole position of the Jews, their sin remained because they said they saw.

Ques. The man said, "Now in this is a wonderful thing". Is that what you had in mind in the thought of knowing, the power to take account of divine things?

J.T. I think that is how matters stand, it helps as the truth is introduced here. It would help young

brothers and sisters among us, as to the schools and colleges, what they hear there, and in business. This chapter is to show them how independent they may be from the standpoint of knowledge; because the unction is "from the holy one" -- the element of holiness is seen. The Lord is declared to be "Son of God in power, according to the Spirit of holiness" (Romans 1:4), the Spirit of holiness entering into His operations even in relation to death; so that all that obtains in relation to what God is, is holy. The Spirit's operations are of the same nature, the unction is from the Holy One. It seems to have a bearing externally, emphasising that the saints are superior in their knowledge.

-.J. Is that involved in what the Lord said to His disciples, that they were not to think out beforehand what they would say, but in that hour it would be given to them?

J.T. That is right; and the Spirit of their Father spoke in them. So that the comments on the Lord were that He had never learned -- how did He know these things? And the apostles, too; they were "unlettered", it says. But our passage deals with little children as peculiarly affected by current teachings. They are all against Christ, whatever form they may take; they may even use His name, but they are all antichristian.

P.J.B. Have you religious books particularly in mind?

J.T. Particularly so, and much that is taught in the schools and colleges.

A.M.H. Would the "unction from the holy one" indicate that the test as to what we may read or take in would be holiness?

J.T. Well, I think it is. If you could follow the authors of these books or systems, and hear them speak casually, you would soon detect that the element of holiness was not there. I believe that is the test.

Of course, it raises the whole question of how the truth is presented; so that when the Lord spoke to the twelve and said, "Will ye also go away?" Peter replied, "Lord, to whom shall we go? thou hast words of life eternal; ... thou art the holy one of God", John 6:67 - 69. His words were of that character.

J.H.S. What are we to understand by the words in verse 27, "the unction which ye have received from him" -- from whom have we received the unction?

J.T. I think it is John's way of speaking; whether he alludes to the Father or to the Son, and we might add even the Spirit, the pronoun is used; as for instance, in verse 29, "ye know that he is righteous", that would be Christ in a practical way, but it is God, too. It helps us at the present time to see that it is God, and how John is so full of the Deity, whether it be in any one of the Persons, or in the whole Three, John uses the pronoun, without at the time being specific. I think that is his way of imparting the thought of the Deity of each of the Persons. What has been remarked as to the Holy One in verse 20 is, I think, important; that underlying all teaching is the holiness of God, and all antichristian teaching is without it, and must of necessity be without it. That is the test.

J.H.B. Would another feature of what is true be that it tends to cause us to abide in Him, as in the end of verse 27?

J.T. Just so. In verse 20, it is to assert the independency of young christians, they have an unction from the Holy One and know all things. Then verse 27 opens it up more; it is "yourselves" there, calling attention to us in that way. Christians are marked off by that word 'yourselves'. "As the same unction teaches you as to all things, and is true and is not a lie, and even as it has taught you, ye

shall abide in him" -- that is, the teaching of the unction is to fix us, to impart fixity, because the idea is that we are set up in relation to God in the sense of being in Him, or in relation to Christ, so that one knows where he is, by the teaching.

Ques. Is there any divine teaching at all apart from the unction?

J.T. I think not; teaching is by the Spirit; but the use of the word here is, I think, to bring it home to us as something already known, having external characteristics, so that persons so taught are marked off.

Ques. What would be the difference between this and the anointing as in Corinthians?

J.T. Well, the thought of anointing in 2 Corinthians 1 is to mark us off; it is not a question of teaching. "Now he that establishes us with you in Christ, and has anointed us, is God, who also has sealed us, and given the earnest of the Spirit in our hearts". That is a threefold expression of the truth of what God has done by the Spirit. There is not much difference, so far as I understand, between the two words; in either case I think it is what is external characteristically, what the saint is as marked off from others by the Spirit. His public external characteristic is the anointing, and then the sealing is the assertion of divine ownership, and the earnest would be his own portion in his heart. God has done all that by the Spirit. Now the anointing here (1 John) has in mind what is seen in the way of teaching as over against the ordinary teachings of men; and the fact that it is of the Holy One is to stress the thought of holiness.

If John had said, 'from the Spirit' in verse 20, it would, of course, be the Person; but it is rather the character -- "from the holy one", the thing emanates from Him.

Rem. I was wondering whether the thought in Corinthians was more what was outward in the way

of testimony, and that here perhaps the formation of subjective features after Christ, the thing that is true in Him being true in the saints (chapter 2: 8).

J.T. Well, it is that. It is the public characteristic that is in mind in the unction, as marking off a young Christian, for instance, as he sits in the train, or walks in the street, or works in the office; what he does and what he says is distinctive in that way, as over against those who have not the Spirit and are not Christians. The passage in 2 Corinthians to which you refer gives the threefold view: how God takes account of us as in our public character as anointed, dignified by the Spirit, and then as the property of God as sealed, in divine ownership, and thirdly our own portion, satisfaction in what we have heard, in the earnest of the Spirit.

Ques. Would you say a little as to the latter part of verse 27, "even as it has taught you, ye shall abide in him"?

J.T. The apostle returns to the subject, after speaking of the antichrists, exposing what antichristian teaching means, the denial of the Father and the Son; he returns to the subject of the unction, and calls attention to "yourselves" -- that class of persons. Then he says the unction which we have received from Him abides in us. All this is characteristic; it abides in you, and you have no need that anyone should teach you -- asserting that the saints are independent of man's teaching. 'Abiding in him' would, I think, imply being set up in relation with God in a fixed way; that we know where we are, and can give an account of where we are, and of the fixity of the position, because of the teaching. The passage is to set up the saints, and especially young Christians, intelligently in relation with God in their souls. It is not merely to be thinking on what is said by others, but they are formed by the unction, and abide in Him thus. The unction abiding in me

gives fixity in relation to Him, and then abiding in Him follows; it is on account of His teaching that we know where we are.

Ques. Is it not rather important that the effect of the teaching is that an objective is produced?

J.T. Young christians, and maybe all of us, are very poorly fixed, very uncertain in our minds as to the state of our souls; and the apostle is aiming at setting us up in certainty and intelligence by the teaching of the unction. It is not exactly the teaching of the Scriptures, or of those who have ability to teach, but the teaching of the unction.

J.H.B. Is the point not so much as to what the unction is, but as to whether we are conscious of being brought under divine teaching? I mention that because one is not exactly clear as to what the unction means.

J.T. Well, it alludes to what the christian already knows. The apostle is not treating of something new, but of what is already known to the persons addressed. So in coming back to the subject in verse 27 he says, "yourselves" -- he throws us in upon ourselves as to who we are, are we in this class of persons, marked off in this way? So that if we have received it, we know what is meant, we know what the apostle means, it is that by which we are taught; it is the Spirit of God, of course, but it is the teaching, how we have been taught by Him. If John had used the word 'Spirit', or 'Holy Spirit', of course it would be the Person; but he is alluding to what is already known, what is experienced. The saints are addressed as already having this, it is not something new, but what we have already, and it abides in you, and according to its teaching, you abide in Him.

P.J.B. Have you in mind in emphasising "yourselves" that the trend of religious teaching is to destroy the distinctive character that belongs to the

christian, and to link him with the religious activities that are current?

J.T. Yes. It is not simply that we are to be in fellowship; that is a nice phrase, and good in its own way; but "yourselves" means a known class that have taken on this teaching. The enemy would obliterate its distinctiveness, and young people are so exposed to that, that they are just like others; the point is that the distinction is to be maintained. "Yourselves" have that distinction, ye have received the unction, and He is able to abide in you, and you are to abide in Him, to be fixed in that position and not to be moved away from it.

Ques. Does Psalm 4:3 touch it at all, "The Lord hath set apart him that is godly for himself"?

J.T. Yes, it does. The passage in 2 Corinthians that has been cited implies that He has sealed us, we are His property, He has set us apart.

A.M.H. Would the epistle help to develop certain spiritual instincts in the saints whereby they would know all things?

J.T. I think that is what is meant; and how pleasing it is for heaven to see brethren marked off in this way, not merely by the profession of certain principles or a creed, but in the unction, the real thing from God, the Holy One. Not only that the saints are relatively holy, but holy in the way we understand and speak of things.

A.M.H. Do you think that can be damaged? David said (Psalm 51:11), "take not the spirit of thy holiness from me"; that was after his sin. Do we need to be thus on our guard?

J.T. Yes, and to avoid all light reading; the more such we read the more we are damaged, instead of maintaining the spirit of holiness.

C.W.H. Does 1 Corinthians 14:32 enter into this "And spirits of prophets are subject to prophets"?

J.T. The allusion there is to your own spirit.

Each of us has a spirit from God, and the 'prophet' represents, as it were, the proprietor of it. Romans 7 brings out "I myself", that is yourself, not your spirit. "I myself with the mind serve God's law". I think that underlies what is said about the prophets; the prophet, as ministering, has under control all his faculties, and even although he has received an impulse in his spirit, he does not need to get up and speak at once; he can control that. The prophets are to be balanced in the part they take in the assembly, not to be carried along by impulse, but to be governed by intelligence. So Paul says earlier (chapter 14: 15), "I will sing with the spirit, and I will sing with the understanding also": that would allude to the faculty of control.

C.W.H. I was thinking of the detection of what is external, and that if the antichristian element appeared, it would be refused.

J.T. Well, when we come to chapter 4 we shall see the kind of spirits that are at work, and the Spirit of God is attributed to the christian as confessing Jesus Christ come in flesh; whereas those who do not confess Him come in flesh are governed by evil spirits. The passage in chapter 3 treats of how we are to know that He abides in us; and chapter 4: 13 is how we are to know that we abide in Him and He in us. These passages are intended to settle us as to where we are, and that we are intelligent as to our state, and what we enjoy -- all is by the Spirit.

J.H.B. What is the difference between our abiding in Him, and the thought of God abiding in us?

J.T. Well, I think God abiding in us (chapter 3:24) is that He is complacent in us; a very great thought, that God rests in His people as complacent in them. Abiding in us means that there is nothing to disturb Him; there is fixity. The dove found no rest for the sole of her foot, and returned to the ark, to Noah. I think that would suggest how God by His Spirit

finds restfulness in His people as He found it in Christ. The dove came down and abode upon Christ; there was nothing to disturb it. The Spirit now enables us to understand that, that God is restful in us. Then we have the additional thought in chapter 4:13; we are to know that we abide in Him and He in us, that is, He secures our hearts in restfulness in Him, so that there is a fixed state of things between God and His people, and all maintained in the intelligence of His people by the Spirit.

Rem. You get the word 'abiding' in regard to the Spirit descending and abiding upon the Lord.

J.T. There was restfulness there, in the dove coming down and abiding upon Him. There was nothing to disturb Him; and I believe that is the thought here; God abides in us, there is nothing to disturb Him, and then He secures us in that we abide in Him, we are restful in God, the Spirit making all this intelligible to us.

Ques. Is this to have an effect upon the saints in every sphere, and in our movements in the world generally?

J.T. John is dealing with us in that way; whatever the circumstances, I think this applies, the sense of God being restful in you, and you being restful in Him, and being intelligent as to it. John's ministry has often been spoken of as abstract, as it is; much would come in to modify this, but these are basic thoughts and are intended to make us stable in an intelligent and conscious way; it is all by the Spirit, not merely by doctrine, but by the Spirit.

Ques. I was wondering whether this was preparatory to John 14, where the Lord says that if a man love Him, he would keep His word and His Father would love him, and They would come to him and make Their abode with him. Is not what you are speaking of essential if we are to know anything of a divine visitation?

J.T. Quite so. If His commandments are disregarded, as they have been, the keeping of them brings us back to this position (John 14:23.) All this fits into this, I think. It is to make real Christians out of us, we are to be in possession of things by the Spirit, not merely by doctrine, but by the Spirit.

Ques. In chapter 4: 15 it is a question of "Whosoever shall confess that Jesus is the Son of God". This wonderful result comes about as the effect of confessing that He is Son of God. In Romans 10 salvation is realised by confessing Him as Lord; what is the difference?

J.T. Well, confessing Him to be Son of God is a further thought. The verses we have read speak of the Spirit, and that is what we are dealing with, to show the place the Spirit has in this epistle, and how essential He is to our practical enjoyment of fixity of our Christianity. Many other things, of course, are mentioned in that verse; and then again in verse 16, "God is love; and he that dwelleth in love dwelleth in God, and God in him". There is much that works out of these verses by the Spirit, but the point is that the Spirit is the actual power to make it all effective in us, to make it sure to us, giving us the consciousness of it. Then as regards the teaching that is current, the beginning of chapter 4 speaks of the spirits, we are not to believe every, spirit, but to prove them, as to whether they are of God, because many false prophets are gone out into the world. "Every spirit which confesses Jesus Christ come in flesh is of God; and every spirit which does not confess Jesus Christ come in flesh is not of God". So that it is the incarnation that is in mind -- Jesus Christ come in flesh; not has come, but is come -- it is the present fact; and every spirit that confesses that is of God. It is christianity essentially, as knowing Christ.

Ques. Do you refer to His glorified condition now?

J.T. "Come in flesh" includes that. It is not what He was, but that He is come in flesh.

C.W.H. The witness of the Spirit makes that clear, as coming from Him in glory.

J.T. I think so; every spirit that confesses that is of God, so that I suppose it includes what the Lord is at the present time, as in a new condition, but still in flesh, so that we have part in it. Christianity implies that we have part in it. Chapter 5 shows that He came in relation to cleansing, so it says He "came by water and blood"; that would be coming in flesh and blood, as at the beginning. But I think that "come in flesh" would cover Christ as He is, and the Spirit coming down witnesses to that.

Ques. Do you mean that the "water and blood" refers to the incarnation?

J.T. I think so; He came in in that connection He came to die.

A.M.H. Coming by water and blood would be to sweep away everything before Him, and "come in flesh" would be that He abides.

J.T. I think that is it. Chapter 5 is His condition here; but He Himself remains, and we have part in His humanity now.

Ques. Would the blood and water coming out of His side in the gospel bear on this?

J.T. The allusion is to that. The water is first here; it is second in the gospel. I suppose the epistle stresses the great need of dealing with our state; the blood deals with our guilt, our sins; the water deals with our state, setting aside all that would hinder us having part with Christ in a new condition. The Spirit is the witness to that.

Ques. Would chapter 5 also have a reference to His having come by water and blood into His present position?

J.T. Well, it takes in the whole position; but the point is to bring out that He came in that connection. You get it predicated of Him. In chapter 5: 6 it is "he that came by water and blood", but in chapter 4 it is "come in flesh", to stress the present time; the other is past, the Spirit having in mind His coming to deal with conditions that were here.

Ques. Does it suggest that the Lord Jesus is not available to men in His life here apart from this, His coming by water and blood?

J.T. All His service had that in mind; there would be no point in His service if He did not come by water and blood; what would His teaching and miracles have availed aside from this fact, that He came to deal with the things He was exposing, and to deal with them to God's glory?

J.H.B. What is the difference between verse 6, the Spirit bearing witness, and verse 8, where they that bear witness are three, the Spirit, and the water, and the blood, and they agree in one?

J.T. The water and the blood by themselves are in relation to the death of Christ in the two aspects; you may say, speaking reverently, that the water and the blood are subdivisions, for the sake of teaching, of the great fact of His death; the water dealing with our condition, man's condition, as seen in Romans 7 and 8, and the blood dealing rather with the earlier part of Romans, the question of our guilt. It is simply the teaching of the death of Christ subdivided as touching these two great phases of man's condition, his guilt before God and his state before God; both have to be dealt with on the basis of the death of the Lord Jesus. The Spirit bears witness to it; the ministry of the twelve, and particularly of Paul, deals with our state as well as our guilt, and I think the witness of the Spirit would refer particularly to Paul's teaching, which the Spirit is constantly

pressing upon us now. In the historical account in John 19, the blood is first, because, I suppose, the guilt of man is the first thing that is dealt with, and then the state man was in. Here it is the state first because the guilt question and its settlement had been generally accepted amongst the saints, but not so much the water as dealing with their state. "It is the Spirit that bears witness, for the Spirit is the truth". I suppose the meaning of that would be that the brethren were not receiving the whole truth; they were receiving forgiveness, and enjoying it -- the truth that relates to our guilt; but the Spirit "is the truth", that is, He would set out the full truth, as in a man like the apostle Paul, a man who went the whole way, he would set it out in a positive way, being a man who had been delivered from his sins and also from the power of sin in him. So that in verse 7 "they that bear witness are three". Part of verse 7 in the Authorised Version is not scripture at all -- the reference to the Father witnessing in heaven there is no point in that. It is what is down here, there are three witnesses, the Spirit, the water, and the blood, and the three agree in one. The point is a threefold testimony that cannot be broken; it is a complete testimony.

Ques. In connection with the words in chapter 4: 3, "come in flesh", would you connect that with the end of Luke's gospel and the beginning of the Acts the Lord in resurrection? He said, "a spirit has not flesh and bones as ye see me having", Luke 24:39.

J.T. Yes, it is what He is now. He is come; not 'has' come, but He is come; so that it bears on His present condition. That is christianity. It is His humanity in a new condition in which the saints have part; that condition did not exist when He was in flesh and blood here; He was alone, there was no man ever like Him; it was a wholly distinct thing; no one before or since ever could be like Him.

"Except the grain of wheat falling into the ground die, it abides alone; but if it die, it bears much fruit"; so that we are of His kind, there are many like Him now: that is really christianity. So it says in Hebrews 2, "For it became him", (that is God) "... in bringing many sons to glory, to make perfect the leader of their salvation through sufferings. For both he that sanctifies and those sanctified are all of one; for which cause he is not ashamed to call them brethren". They are all "of one", of one kind. That is the truth that really exposes modernism -- christianity in the true sense of it, in another Man.

A.M.H. The thought of Jesus Christ "come in flesh" as including all that He is now is so important, otherwise we shall be taking Him in the way that the unitarians do, and the Oxford Group, where there is no thought as to what He is now, they only have an attempted imitation of what He was on earth.

J.T. True christianity is Christ as He is in heaven, and our having part with Him there by the Spirit. It is of the very last importance to keep that before us, because that is the only thing that stands against the current evil. "Such as the heavenly one, such also the heavenly ones", 1 Corinthians 15:48.

P.J.B. Is that why it emphasises "not by water only, but by water and blood"?

J.T. It is the complete thing; there is not merely a witness, but the Spirit "is the truth". Christ was "the truth" when here, and the Spirit is now the truth; and the truth implies the two great thoughts of the death of the Lord Jesus in its application to us, and it involves another Man in another place and another condition, and our having part in that. "Is come" is a continuous thought.

Ques. Would His being anointed with oil of gladness above His companions fit in?

J.T. Yes, it does, only that is to bring out His

distinction above His companions; but still they are His companions. The Lord always has the pre-eminence.

Ques. Would not the witness of the water create in us a spirit of self-judgment, so that we might be able to get the gain of the unction?

J.T. Quite so. Then this witness leads us to the great thought of eternal life; that amplifies what we are saying as to Christ being in another condition now. Eternal life has been referred to as an out-of-the-world, heavenly condition and relationship and being, that is the humanity in which we have part -- He, of course, always retaining His personal distinction and deity, that can never be touched, but this is what He is as Man.

Rem. So that the youngest believer in Christ, when presented with that, would instinctively feel as to whether other teaching was in accord with it.

J.T. That is the point, I think. The spirits that are in current literature, what are they? Literature or teaching or whatever it is that confesses Jesus Christ come in flesh is of God; that is the test for us.

C.O.B. Would you link up the way the Spirit is referred to? First the "unction from the holy one"; then "the Spirit which he has given to us", the "Spirit of God", then "his Spirit" and finally "the Spirit is the truth".

J.T. That is a good enquiry. What was said at the beginning, I think, is understood by us, what the unction means; it alludes to the teaching of the Spirit, known already, but enlarged on; then in the last verse of chapter 3 we are to know that God abides in us. Surely that is an important question; it is known "by the Spirit which he has given to us". In chapter 4: 13 you will notice that it is "of his Spirit", not simply that He has given us His Spirit, but He has given us "of" His Spirit. I think that is

a most intimate thought, that we are sharing with God in His Spirit; it is a sharing thought; I do not think you get it elsewhere, but it is a very precious thing with God that we are sharing in His Spirit. It is not so much the Person of the Spirit, as that which God shares with you. Then "the Spirit is the truth" is manifestly a question of His testimony down here, the whole truth is in the Spirit; Christ is the truth objectively and the whole truth lies in the Spirit, subjectively now here in the saints. Then there is the other thought, in chapter 4: 2, the Spirit as regards what is of God, as over against other spirits; He is known by the confession of Jesus Christ come in flesh, and I think that opens up the great thought of our part with Christ and eternal life.

C.O.B. I wondered whether they were progressive thoughts, culminating in what the Spirit is.

J.T. I think that is so. He is the truth -- the whole truth, as here in a subjective way, because the Spirit is really in the saints, He is not outside of us; and, of course, that extends to what we have in what is known as the canon of Scripture. The canon of Scripture is what has been arrived at as the effect of the Spirit, by the consensus of spiritual instincts in the people of God, not by 'church councils'. In the revision of 1611 they included the Apocrypha in the canon, but they would not do it now. The Spirit is the whole truth; there is that here which has a clear testimony to everything, there is no doubt about it, so that the saints of God know things. This epistle is to bring out that the saints of God should know things. It implies that there is power here in the Spirit. Young people who have need of getting certainty will get it there and nowhere else; so that the epistle ends: "We know that we are of God, and the whole world lies in the wicked one. And we know that the Son of God has come, and has given us an understanding

that we should know him that is true; and we are in him that is true, in his Son Jesus Christ. He is the true God and eternal life".

C.O.B. The Lord when here could say, "I am ... the truth", John 14:6.

J.T. The Spirit is the counterpart of that; it is the same expression exactly.

SHEEP

Isaiah 53:6; Psalm 119:176; Song of Songs 6:6; John 10:14, 15

I wish to speak this evening about sheep, that is, sinners viewed as such, and then saints viewed as sheep. When Adam named the creatures, the land animals particularly, he would convey, in the names given, the traits of each; according to God, the name is to convey what the person or thing is characteristically, and these traits were intended by God, as in these creatures, to serve His testimony later. Some of them even represented Christ Himself in a figurative way, and among these sheep are worthy of special attention. The idea of a sheep is used to typify, in certain senses, the Lord Himself; indeed, in this very chapter I have read from in Isaiah, the Lord is said to have been like a sheep dumb before His shearers, as you will observe -- "he is brought as a lamb to the slaughter, and as a sheep before her shearers is dumb, so he openeth not his mouth". That is a sheep characteristic, and I hope to come back to it as seen in Christ, showing that God intends in the gospel to secure us at least in that characteristic, for the gospel has Christ in mind, not only as the Saviour, but as the Model for all those who are saved; God intends to make all the saints like Jesus. A sheep does not represent all that Jesus is, even typically, there are other important features, but the sheep has a great place. John's sheep particularly represent the saints as conformed to Christ and attractive to Him, loved by Him because of that. They are not viewed as straying or lost in John, because John is concerned about persons who are like Christ, and the sheep are amongst these, they represent that. But Isaiah, by the Spirit, says, "All we

like sheep have gone astray"; that is not a trait that ever shone in Jesus, I need not say, it never was seen there; the blessed Lord Jesus is "holy, harmless, undefiled, separate from sinners, and made higher than the heavens", Hebrews 7:26. He never did anything contrary to the divine will, the will of His Father, never in thought or word or deed. So that we must first look at these creatures presented in this verse as persons who have exercised their own wills, the very opposite to Jesus -- "not my will", He says, "but thine be done", Luke 22:42.

Now there may be some here, christians, as we say, that is, God has wrought in you, but your will has not gone yet, you are not subdued, and your parents are concerned about you -- you exercise your will. "All we like sheep" -- it is a collective thought, and is, of course, inclusive of a great many; but then we have the individuals in the passage, as it says, "we have turned every one to his own way" -- every one. Some young boy here, fairly acceptable to his parents, naturally acceptable, fairly obedient to what his father tells him, as in the parable the Lord uses in Matthew 21:28 - 30, he said to one of his sons, "go work today in my vineyard". He said, I will go -- but he did not go, that is the kind of thing. Another one said, I will not go. Well, that is a very objectionable attitude for a young person to take up towards his parents, it is often done. I will not go, he says; there is much of that kind of thing, and it is passed by, too. But then the Lord's parable is intended to show that the one who said he would go did not go, and the one who said he would not go did go, and the Lord shows that the one who did go did the will of his father. His father would thank God as he saw him going off to the vineyard; he would mourn as he failed to see the other one go; so that the first one is choosing his own way -- "every one", it says here, "to his own way"; that was his own way, that is,

he was a deceptive young man, a very objectionable feature, he was not an honest young man. The other was a bit impertinent, a bit insolent, but he was obedient in the long run, and that is the point. "Every one to his own way" -- as we say, 'his own sweet will'. It will become a bitter will; never did anybody do his own will but it brought bitterness. "Every one to his own way"; well, that is what is stated here and it is put in this setting to bring out that, in spite of that disobedience, in spite of that waywardness, God is acting in your favour. He is acting at great sacrifice, too, in your favour, mark you, it is "the iniquity of us all"; those people who are going astray and doing what they will do -- God is acting at great sacrifice in their favour. These wilful actions of these sheep are all counted up by God, He does not omit one. If we take them to be the lost sheep of the house of Israel spoken of elsewhere, as doubtless they are, how many we cannot say, what wills were active and what deeds they performed in their self-will! But Jehovah was writing them all down, not one is omitted; for God keeps books, and that is one of the most solemn things to bear in mind -- book-keeping indeed occurs. People do not trust their memories, they put their things in books and accountancy and the vast system of mathematics is all needed because we cannot keep everything in our minds, it is worked out scientifically, as we say. But God keeps books, too; it is not that He cannot keep things in His mind -- nothing can pass His mind, but He uses figures to come down to our way of thinking, as much as to say, 'Do not be deceived, I have not omitted one of your sins, not one -- they are all written down'; but then, as written down, He has laid them on Jesus, "The Lord hath laid on him the iniquity of us all" -- all that is very touching, and especially as we go on down the verses. The Spirit of God brings before us the sheep character of Christ

in the very next verse -- how different! He is not doing His own will. We see Him in Gethsemane under the greatest pressure -- not yet from God, He was not on the cross in Gethsemane, He was not bearing sins in Gethsemane -- and His sweat was as it were great drops of blood falling down to the ground. So great was the pressure, and how the Lord felt it! but in that pressure He says to the Father, "not my will, but thine be done". He was not turning to His own way. He speaks of His own will, but it is the Father's will. It is the Father there, not God; He is still in the unclouded precious favour of His Father, but He is under pressure, He is facing death, not ordinary death, not mere martyrdom, but the death of the cross, which meant the forsaking of God, which meant bearing the full wrath of God; that was what He was facing, so He says, "not my will, but thine be done". What was God's will? He is laying all these waywardnesses, these wilful acts of young and old, spoken of in the previous verse, on this precious Saviour. God is doing that; He could not do it without Jesus -- we must understand there are things God could not do. There was no sacrifice worthy of the name really save that of Jesus; no one else on whom these iniquities could be laid. There were, of course, types of it, but we are told expressly that the blood of bulls and goats and the ashes of an heifer could never take away sins -- only the blood of Jesus. So that Jesus is acting for these straying wayward sheep of Israel, and any sheep here who is like it, each going his own way. We are here to tell you that God knows it, He knows it well, He has watched every movement, and yet He is acting for you. This meeting is for you, all the prayers that have preceded it are for you; all heaven is for you. Think of what that means! As soon as repentance is seen in anyone, heaven is aglow with interest, all heaven is on your behalf -- "The Lord

hath laid on him the iniquity of us all". I need not enlarge on that, doubtless you have often heard gospel addresses on these verses -- I go on to the psalm.

Some of you may not be as conversant with this Psalm 119 as others are. It is the longest psalm and the longest chapter that the Spirit of God has written, and the verse I read is 176. This is not man's division, as the other chapters of the Bible, generally speaking, are; these psalms are all divinely arranged, the number of them, in nearly every case by the writer -- not in this case: in this psalm the author is not given us, so that we may all put in our name as taking up its language. Speaking of the last verse, you wonder how a man who could write such a psalm as this could say, at the end of it, "I have gone astray like a lost sheep". It is not that it is a matter of history, he is not putting it that way; he has consciously gone astray, not exactly as it was said in Isaiah 53, there they have just gone astray, but here he says, "I have gone astray like a lost sheep"there is a deeper meaning in this, this man is speaking in a deeper way. A lost sheep is a solemn thought; it is a question of not being consciously in ownership. He wants to be -- and God knows that, and God values that. He virtually admits that he belongs to God, but he is wandering like a lost sheep. Like a ship, too, without a compass or a rudder or a master; he knows it, that is important to see, he knows it. The statement in Isaiah is prophetic, persons are speaking in a prophetic way -- "All we like sheep have gone astray, we have turned every one to his own way", but this man brings in the word 'lost'. Is there anyone here like that -- with a sense that you are just without any owner? You have right desires -- there are many like that. If you read this psalm you will marvel at the desires this man had and the way he speaks of the Lord and the ordinances and the word, and so

on, and yet he is not consciously in the hand of an owner. Is there anyone here like that? You are not averse to the brethren, you like them, you like to be with them; you have no pleasure in the world, in theatres or cinemas or race-tracks -- nothing like that; you are sincerely desirous of getting on in the truth of God, and yet you are not settled under the hand of an Owner, there is a sense of being lost, of being astray like a lost sheep, and you would give anything to be like the brethren. You see how happy they are, and you think, Why is it I am not like them? I can speak of the things of God as they can; I can speak even with more sincerity perhaps than some of them; yet they have more liberty, more peace, more joy, than I have. Why is this? Well, this man knows where to go, and he goes there, and that is what I would advise you to do at this time. He says to Jehovah, in the end of the verse, "seek thy servant" -- not because You are the Good Shepherd, not because there is love in Your heart towards me, but seek me because I am of some value to You. I am not saying too much; why should I not think myself of some value to God? Certainly I am. If this man is born again, if you are born again, you are of value to God. If you love the testimony of God, if you love to read the Bible, to come to the meetings, to talk to christians, you certainly are born again; you belong to God, He is your rightful Owner. But then what this man says is, I am of some value to you, and you are of value to the brethren, they are just waiting for you. But the enemy has somehow darkened your mind and as I said before, you have no definiteness, you are like a sheep and not simply a straying sheep -- it is straying, but straying like a lost sheep -- it is the consciousness he has of it. But all the time he says, "I do not forget thy commandments", that is his plea; he is not pleading grace, he is not pleading mercy, he is not even pleading the

death of Christ, he is pleading his own personal value; and he is right and God would not spurn that for a moment, for you are of value to Him as the subject of His work -- the gold is there. And this meeting is for you; He intends to liberate you so that the gold should shine, that you should be consciously it, no longer astray, as I said like a ship in the Atlantic without a compass, without a rudder, without an owner, on a dark night. But all the time you say, 'I do not forget Thy commandments'. At the bottom of your heart you think of God, you think of the brethren, too, you think of the Bible, you love to read it, and yet you are conscious of this, that you are astray like a lost sheep, there is the consciousness of not being attached, you are unattached, if you understand me, an isolated person inwardly -- maybe nice enough in your family and to your friends, but inwardly you are unattached; and the point here is the man knows where to turn, and the plea, too -- "I have not forgotten", he says, "thy commandments". This might even be applied to a person who goes in a little bit for the world, because a man of this kind is likely to; unless he becomes attached the enemy has an advantage. The enemy would say to you, You are not attached to the brethren, you are not attached anywhere, so what does it matter? You are unattached spiritually; you may be tempted to go into the places of evil, for the wicked woman who flatters with her mouth has influence over you. You may have been to a theatre. I knew a christian who used to be attached, in fellowship, and he got away and he slipped into a theatre in New York, and, while sitting there, something was brought up in a play and they quoted John 14. Think of that! think of the devil using the scripture in the stuff he deals out in these wicked theatres. You know, in America they use the word 'comforter' sometimes for 'comfortable', a sort of quilt, and this actor brought it forward

on the stage, and said, 'What did the clergyman say last night at the church?' and the answer was, 'He spoke about the Comforter'. He wanted to speak in a jocular way, but the Lord had this young man in His mind. This young man knew perfectly what John 14 said, that the Lord Jesus had said that He would send another Comforter, and it broke him down in the theatre and he went out and wept bitterly. I only cite that incident to show how unattached persons may come under the influence of evil, even though they may be real christians, as we speak, subjects of the work of God. (Although the word 'christian' means more than that, it is an oracularly given name of disciples of Jesus -- "the disciples were first called Christians in Antioch", Acts 11:26. It is a known, dignified name, referring to real fully developed christians. But still we speak of it in this way that those in whom God has wrought, who have believed, are christians.) If you are unattached, as I say, you are pretty certain to come under the influence of evil, and you may have to weep bitterly, like Peter, for it was the same in his case -- the Lord looked on him at the right time, and the word came to that young man I have spoken of at the right time. You will understand I am not encouraging anybody to go to a theatre to get converted; no, beloved, the guests of the wicked woman there are in the depths of hell, she flatters with her mouth -- flattery is a great thing in connection with these things. So this man says, "I have not forgotten thy commandments", and, if you read the whole psalm you will understand the kind of man he was, yet he was unattached. Need I say Jehovah heard him? If I connect the passage with Luke 15 you will see that it is the converse of this. This man is asking to be sought out. "Seek thy servant", he says. Well, that is Jehovah. Jesus is Jehovah the Saviour, He is the good and the great Shepherd. Luke 15 does not intimate at all that the

lost sheep sought to be found -- that is not the side there, here it is so, and what you find in Luke 15 is the very words here. The point is not that it has gone astray, it is in Matthew 18; here in Luke 15 it is lost, that is, the sheep is lost to its owner and lost to itself, as you might say, straying -- as I have been speaking of it. But the Lord left the ninety and nine -- of course that means something, too, I cannot speak of it now -- He went after the lost one and found it. That is my business here tonight, to tell you that, if a cry reaches Him, there will be no delay. Luke does not say there was a cry, but there is a cry here, and if you put the two scriptures together, you can see how quickly the good Shepherd goes out after the sheep and finds it, and places it on His shoulders and brings it home rejoicing. It is of value, that is the point; this man was conscious he was of value although unattached, away from his Owner. And the Lord intimates plainly enough that a sheep is of value; He troubled to find it and He found it.

Now I want to show you from the Song of Solomon how sheep are viewed collectively and in attractiveness, they form one of the beautiful features of the loved one, that is, the bride in the Song of Solomon, or the assembly, as we may say now. The assembly, of course, in one of its features; it requires more than one feature to make up the beauty the Lord seeks, and the verse I have read gives one of the features the Lord has in mind in finding the sheep, attaching it, as I might say, to Himself; for John 10 works all that out, He attaches it to Himself, the sheep is characteristically attached to Christ, it hears His voice and follows Him, and He moves it from the fold to the flock. The sheep are now beautiful in His eyes and He is putting them together -- that is the next thing, if God has found us He is going to put us somewhere. In John 10 He takes them out of the fold and puts them into the flock; a fold has its

walls round for protection, but a flock is a question of the saints themselves -- it is a movable thought, and it is the sheep character that is in mind. Well now, the sheep character here, as you will observe, is only one trait, but evidently one of the leading traits. In this chapter you have certain things spoken of in regard to the loved one. Verse 4 says she is beautiful and comely; Tirzah and Jerusalem are mentioned, alluding, doubtless, to some administrative position; and an army with banners, referring to military power, and then it says, "Turn away thine eyes from me, For they overcome me", and "Thy teeth are like a flock of sheep Which go up from the washing". These are selected features in this chapter; in the next chapter you have a great many more features. The Lord is reserving these, for, if they are attractive to you, He will give you others in the next chapter, beginning at this feature; for the Lord loves to go over and parade any little bit of beauty He sees in us, it is all a reflection of Himself, and particularly the sheep character. So here He speaks of the loved one's teeth as like a flock of sheep -- that is one part of the beauty of the beloved. It is a collective matter now, and what I am seeking to do is to attract anyone who is interested, but not yet attached, and to show how the Lord would attach you to Himself by giving you to understand how essential you are to what is before Him and how much you are needed, you are needed to add beauty to what He has before Him. You say, I never thought of that. But then, the Lord is the judge, and I would say to you here tonight, if you are not attached, not set up in relation to Christ and His people, you are denying Him His rights; He says, I need you, I need you because of the sheep character I want to present. "Thy teeth are like a flock of sheep Which go up from the washing", that is, they submit to the washing, they do not rebel; that is where the difficulty lies very often, where

saints get light, they do not submit to the washing. The laver stood in the court as you came into the divine system; there must be the washing -- "If I wash thee not", says Jesus, "thou hast no part with me", John 13:8. The Lord would say, I have you, but there must be the washing, the submission to the truth in its cleansing character; not only the blood of Christ, but the water that flowed from His side. They came up from the washing, they had been down there; I suppose that means it is a descent, like baptism. As we see with Philip and the eunuch, there needs to be a going down to the water; there is ascent from that. In chapter 4 we have the same language only it is added that they are shorn sheep; you say, there is not much difference, but there is as regards characteristics; it is like Jesus as a sheep dumb before His shearers. That is how Jesus was, He submitted to the shearers, that is taking up what particularly belongs to the sheep. Many hold themselves aloof in self-will, they will not submit to the requirements of the fellowship. The fellowship has requirements, the Lord has requirements, and shorn sheep, of course, are easier washed -- that is, the idea is that you submit. The Lord gave His "back to the smiters", too, it says, and His "cheeks to them that plucked off the hair" (Isaiah 50:6), there is submission. That is a great point in christianity; one is of no value really in the attached state of things aside from submission. The church is said to be subjected to Christ, that is the mind of God, and practically it must be so, for naturally we have so many wills instead of only one will as in the assembly. Another thing that is mentioned here, and it is a very important thing, too, is that under these circumstances you have fruit-bearing. But the beautiful thought of the mystery, of the teeth as essential to beauty, is what the Lord stresses, but the word is added that they come up from the washing. That is, the Lord sees the

company of the saints free from all defilement, and that is seen in the sheep coming up from the washing. Well, finally, in John we have, as I said before, the full thought of the sheep. John makes a great deal of persons. He tells us, for instance, about fishes, even an hundred and fifty and three great fishes (John 21:11) -- they are counted. There is no idea of the nets being broken, with him it is a question of the quality of the fish. And so here it is the quality of the sheep, they are the sheep viewed as particularly attractive to the Lord; and so John presents the truth I am speaking of in its finality. The link between the Lord and the sheep is most striking, as I have been showing, but here it is not that He has the characteristics of the sheep, but of the Shepherd. In Isaiah 53 He has the characteristics of the sheep; now it is those of the Shepherd so that the more you reach the thought I have in mind, the more you come into the sense of your value in the eyes of the Lord Jesus, and of the love that has gone to such lengths, the more you will be able to say, like the apostle Paul, the greatest of the sheep, as I might say, He "loved me, and gave himself for me", Galatians 2:20. The Lord says, "I am the good shepherd, and know my sheep, and am known of mine. As the Father knoweth me, even so know I the Father: and I lay down my life for the sheep". What a wonderful thing that is, that kind of knowledge, not ordinary knowledge but the kind of knowledge between the Father and the Son -- it is according to that. The Lord says much here; it is a wonderful chapter from this point of view, the sheep, viewed with the characteristics of sheep, as seen in the divine mind from the outset, presented to Jesus now, taking form in those who believe -- "my sheep", He says. I "know my sheep" -- how precious that is. I "know my sheep, and am known of mine. As the Father knoweth me, even so know I the Father", and He says, "I lay down my

life for the sheep", to finish the thought of their value in His eyes, the price He gave for them. And then, as going away, He takes His greatest servant then, Peter, and He says, You look after them -- they are the ones; finally reaching his soul, as he strayed like a sheep, the Lord secures him, and He says, Peter, look after the sheep; feed the lambs, but shepherd the sheep and feed them, too. So that we are taken care of. We see how God has His eye on us and how He would allure us into the circle of the flock where divine love is and knowledge, reciprocal knowledge, such as exists between the Father and the Son.

May the Lord bless the word.

THE ADMINISTRATIVE FEATURE OF CHRISTIANITY (1)

John 3:35, 36; John 4:10 - 42

J.T. We have come to the administrative side of the dispensation in this section of this gospel, and it opens up fresh thoughts which the Lord may, we believe, help to bring out -- the rich thoughts to be administered in the books of Kings and touched on earlier. This section is to bring out the administrative side, how it is based on love. "The Father loveth the Son, and hath given all things into his hand", John 3:35.

A.S. When you say 'the administrative side' do you say that because it says, "the Father ... hath given all things into his hand"?

J.T. That is what I was thinking.

A.S. He is the great Administrator.

J.T. Yes.

Ques. Do you connect that with chapter 4, "if thou knewest ... who it is that saith to thee ..."?

J.T. Yes. That is how the thought is combining one administered to. The woman has to be taken as representative of those administered to, those who were the objects of the administration. So the Lord says, "If thou knewest the gift of God, and who it is that saith to thee, Give me to drink; thou wouldest have asked of him, and he would have given thee living water" (verse 10). That is how the great administration of God is set in movement. The objects are set in movement asking, and then agents come, too; part of the administration. For the woman left her waterpot and went away into the city, meaning that she was part of the administration. That is what entered into her movement. Not that she would

understand. And then the Samaritans came into it, recognising the Lord as the Saviour of the world.

J.S. Is the administrative side seen earlier in the first chapter, "grace and truth subsists through Jesus Christ", John 1:17?

J.T. Those earlier parts bring out what there is.

"Grace and truth subsists through Jesus Christ".

This is to bring the thing into view. That is a great principle in the moral universe. Like all other principles, they have to be made effective. And this is to bring the thing into view. We see grace and truth working in the fourth chapter.

A.N.W. Have we neglected John's ministry in looking at administrative matters?

J.T. Well, perhaps. I thought, maybe, these meetings might serve us in that way, and bring us all into the thing. We have what is set up in the earlier chapters, grace and truth by Jesus Christ. That is, it is one idea. It is what is so needed in the administration. Grace is the first thing needed in God's approach to man. It is in the singular, meaning that it came into being in Christ. As any other great principle in the universe, whatever it be. You may take electricity. It is a great principle. It exists. It is there. Well, the next thing is to make it effective. And grace and truth is the leading thought in the administrative side, because, being sinners, we need that. We need that principle applied. So that John says, "for of his fulness we all have received, and grace upon grace", John 1:16. Not only is it a principle, but they have received the thing. "For of his fulness we all have received, and grace upon grace". It is a steady thing coming in. Persons are the subjects of it.

W.B. That word 'subsists' -- does that carry it through this present dispensation?

J.T. That is what is meant. The law came by Moses. It did not subsist in him. That is, it had no

concrete expression. It came in as an abstract thought. In Christ you would have a concrete expression of it. It subsists there. Grace and truth is one thing, and it is in a Person. And this case in chapter 4 illustrates the point. Chapter 3 brings out the last and greatest of the Old Testament ministers, John the baptist. He speaks about the greatness of Christ, and that he must decrease and Christ must increase. So that approaching the administrative side, the greatness of Christ comes before you, He is from heaven. John defines His position. There is no question about His position administratively; and then finally, "the Father loveth the Son". That is a great fact to lay hold of, "and hath given all things into his hand". And then this solemn fact -- "He that believes on the Son has life eternal, and he that is not subject to the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of God abides upon him". That is the position of the believer and the unbeliever. They are divided. The one has eternal life, and the other has the wrath of God abiding on him, that is, an insubject person.

Ques. Is it meant that administration is carried on by the Spirit through the saints?

J.T. Well, it is. We shall come to that when we come to the official side, the agents that are used. Here it is the great central thought, all things in the hand of one Person. We shall have subdivisions later. We shall see other agents later. And we are apprised of the fact beforehand that He gives not the Spirit by measure. But the first great thing to take into our souls is this great Person -- it is the question of the Father and the Son. It is a dispensation of pure grace.

A.M'd. Do we see this in type in Pharaoh giving to Joseph? He put Joseph over the land.

J.T. Well, yes. But you have the thought here of the Father loving the Son. It does not say that Pharaoh loved Joseph. There is no language of

relationship, no family relationship at all. Here it is a pure family relationship.

H.E. Do you get the thought in Paul committing to Timothy?

J.T. That is good.

Ques. Would you say that grace and truth subsist in the Son as having been here in time to set it forth, having been sent by the Father?

J.T. It is a great general principle. What John says does not simply refer to what He was here in the flesh. This was written after Christ had gone to heaven. That is, it is the present time. The gospel was written after Christ had died and had gone into heaven.

Rem. Grace and truth did not subsist in Moses.

J.T. No. It had no concrete expression. But now we have the great moral system subsisting in one Person, up there, so as to be effective. The system is now set up and it is being effective.

J.S. And the exemplification of it was set forth in chapter 4.

J.T. That is to illustrate how the thing works out. "Of his fulness we all have received, and grace upon grace". They are witnesses of the great fact that grace is there. One wave after another. Chapter 4 shows how a poor sinner is administered to. She becomes part of it. You have the idea of a vessel in her.

Rem. Your speaking of electricity is a good example, because it speaks of an abstract element that has to be harnessed, and that comes in in chapter 4.

J.T. Quite so.

Rem. Would you say that it is "Come, see a man"? It is not an official position.

J.T. That is very beautiful, how she becomes interested in the Man so as to speak of Him. She becomes a servant. And the object of these meetings

is to bring us into line with the administration. It is worked out in us in measure.

J.S. He filled vessels in chapter 2, and how He fills this one.

J.T. That is right. There were six waterpots empty, and He filled them to the brim. And now she is filled. That material waterpot is not the idea. She is the idea.

J.S. She is filled and overflowing.

J.T. Quite so. She went to the men and told them that.

A.F.M. Were you not struck with the speediness of all this? The woman coming to the well with an empty vessel and going away almost immediately. Are you not struck with the speed of it?

J.T. Very strikingly so. She took time to get rid of her natural thoughts. "Art thou greater than our father Jacob ... ?" Well, He was greater. That is the point He made. "If thou knewest ... who it is ...". She says, "I see that thou art a prophet", showing she was coming into the thing.

W.N. Was the thought to bring her into a place of administration?

J.T. Well, yes. She says, "Come, see a man".

But she has the official thought. "Come, see a man ... is not he the Christ?" And they went further and said He was the Saviour of the world. It is the Person in the administration that is in mind; how He is going to make effective what is being administered.

Ques. Does the Father give all things into His hand because the principles subsist in Him?

J.T. John himself is the ideal witness in this gospel. He tells the Jews in Jerusalem who the Lord is, and as he sees the Spirit come down he says, "I have seen and borne witness that this is the Son of God". And then we have this great fact that the

Father loves the Son. And God gives everything into His hand because He loves Him.

Ques. And does the fact that it is committed into the hands of His Son become the background of the anointing side?

J.T. Well, that is the way it is worked out. First she says, "is not he the Christ?" They say, "this is indeed the Saviour of the world". We have these administrative features.

C.A.M. We reach this by the way of need. But what impressed me was the allusion to the fact that the vessels were filled. There is a fulness to fill the universe.

J.T. Quite so. He is full of what men need so much. He came by water and blood. But He is full of grace and truth. The vessels are filled by His appointment. Then she is filled. "Is not he the Christ?" She is filled with the thought of Him. And the Samaritans come round to another thought. So that we are coming into the administrative thoughts of God. They are the subjects of the administration, so that they become part of the administration. "Of his fulness we all have received, and grace upon grace".

E.P. Would the thought of the promises of God, "In him is the yea, and in him the amen" (2 Corinthians 1:20) enter into that at all?

J.T. I think so. "Glory to God by us". "Me and Silvanus and Timotheus". They were part of the administration. And "glory to God by us" would be in that way. Glory to God by the Samaritans. She represents Christ in you. Christ was in her. She is full of Him.

C.A.M. The very fact that there is a question raised, whether the thing is yea or nay, and whether there exists need, these things seem to have served a wonderful purpose.

J.T. Well, that is your history and mine. God

met us in our need, on the principle of grace. Grace is that which meets need; and in turn we become part of the administration. So that John says, "one of the two who heard this from John ... finds his own brother Simon", John 1:40, 41. He immediately becomes part of the administration. He finds his brother and Philip finds Nathanael.

A.F.M. Do you think that there is a coincidence that He "has given all things to be in his hand" and the Samaritans, having heard and believed, knew that He was indeed the Saviour of the world?

J.T. You can see how their mind widened. She says, "is not he the Christ?" They say, "we have heard him ourselves, and we know that this is indeed the Saviour of the world". They go beyond her. "And we know that this is indeed the Saviour of the world". What witnesses they were!

J.S. So that the presentation of the truth would be universal.

J.T. That is how it works. "The Christ" did not go beyond Israel in her mind. Her mind did not travel as wide as the world. It is remarkable that their minds travelled beyond it. A young christian sometimes comes into the thing in that way. They see the position at once.

W.B. It says, "Philip, going down to a city of Samaria, preached the Christ to them", Acts 8:5. He would be a vessel, too.

J.T. Quite so. He took up the very thought that she had.

Rem. Where He says in the end of Matthew, "All power has been given me in heaven and upon earth", does He emphasise the same point?

J.T. Quite so. That is an important point. At the top of the mount some doubted. They were not like this woman. Some of us are not nearly so fresh and vigorous as the youngest believer. He did not stop to prove this to unbelievers. He says, "All

power has been given me in heaven and upon earth". And then He charges His disciples. "Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations", and "behold, I am with you". That is the position in Matthew.

W.B. Because some doubted, that did not stop the flow of the administration.

J.T. Not at all. He did not stop to correct or rebuke them. It is a very important matter that we have got to go on with the administration. This woman became a part of the administrative side. At first she was the object of the administration, then she became part of it, in that the Lord used her. She was ministering Christ. She went and told the men about Christ. She was really preaching the gospel. And it is more significant because she had come with a vessel and left it, as much as to say, 'That is not the thing at all'.

C.A.M. Perhaps some of our minds, when thinking of administration, instinctively refer to Matthew's gospel. But what I noticed in that reference to it is that power seems to be the great word.

J.T. That is the thing. To make disciples of all the nations. That is not how the thing actually occurred historically. Paul and Barnabas made disciples. Making disciples is an act of power. Later on so-called evangelists emanated from Rome. But that was not the Lord's thought. The Lord's thought was to make them.

W.B. So in the first verse of this chapter, the Pharisees heard that Jesus made and baptised more disciples than John.

J.T. Quite so. A question has been raised about the administrative side there. It is a great administrative gospel. Matthew says, one who gives a cup of cold water in the name of a disciple shall not lose his reward. Not only giving it in the Lord's name, but in the name of a disciple, and then he speaks about a righteous man, too, in chapter 10. The

Lord says, "He that receives you receives me, and he that receives me receives him that sent me. He that receives a prophet in the name of a prophet, shall receive a prophet's reward; and he that receives a righteous man in the name of a righteous man, shall receive a righteous man's reward. And whosoever shall give to drink to one of these little ones a cup of cold water only, in the name of a disciple, verily I say unto you, he shall in no wise lose his reward", Matthew 10:40 - 42. That shows how the thought of administration descends to the smallest thing, doing it in the name of a disciple.

A.F.M. It is not forgotten.

J.T. Quite so.

A.N.W. I suppose the little matter becomes an important victory in the soul.

J.T. Very good. It is remarkable how the Lord brings it down to the name of a righteous man.

E.P. Do you mean that the name of a disciple would supply the motive for it?

J.T. That seems to be the thought. Carrying the idea of administration down from Christ to the apostles, and then to a prophet, in the name of a prophet, and then a righteous man, in the name of a righteous man; and then in the name of a disciple. It is to bring the thing down to an ordinary disciple.

E.P. So that the act would really be the act of a disciple.

J.T. Well, it would be. A cup of cold water only; it is to be done in the name of a disciple. It is a very small thing, but the point is the name. All these different persons are officials, you might say. Apostles, prophets -- the gradation from Christ down to a disciple. The name holds, and is to be honoured.

R.W.S. How does this differ from John's presentation?

J.T. John works the thing out from instinct. He does not make much of office. So that you will

notice in verse 27, the disciples come. They had gone into the city. The woman left as they came, and went and told the men in the city. And then it says in verse 31, "But meanwhile the disciples asked him saying, Rabbi, eat. But he said to them, I have food to eat which ye do not know. The disciples therefore said to one another, Has any one brought him anything to eat? Jesus says to them, My food is that I should do the will of him that has sent me, and that I should finish his work. Do not ye say, that there are yet four months and the harvest comes? Behold, I say to you, Lift up your eyes and behold the fields, for they are already white to harvest. He that reaps receives wages and gathers fruit unto life eternal, that both he that sows and he that reaps may rejoice together. For in this is verified the true saying, It is one who sows and another who reaps. I have sent you to reap that on which ye have not laboured; others have laboured, and ye have entered into their labours", John 4:31 - 38. Now, I think we shall see in this paragraph from verses 31 to 38, that before the Spirit of God finishes the subject of the woman, He brings in the actual servants -- those who were actually engaged at that time, and shows their position. They are in line with all this. There are the fields, white to harvest. You did not sow for that harvest. He is putting it upon us. A young christian who believed yesterday may be fresher and brighter than most of us. The Lord would bring the truth home to us. There is the field, white to harvest. What about the reaping?

Rem. Is it intended thus to expose those who are serving? This woman acts instinctively; she does things on that basis.

J.T. That is what I was thinking. She works from instinct, not from official appointment. She represents John's way of bringing in the truth. But there were those there who had official appointment.

How were they occupied? They were all in the town buying bread. One might have done that. Not one of us reaping a sheaf today and the fields are white to harvest!

N.W. What was the defect in the administration?

J.T. They were occupied with mere bread. They did not all need to go into the town to buy a loaf of bread. That is brought up to test them several times. They had left the Lord alone.

A.N.W. You were speaking of a day-old christian having a right instinct. What is the secret of the instinct getting blunted? Why is our instinct blunted?

J.T. That is the point. Here we are, and the Lord would say to us, 'Well, where have you been today?' Here is one here. "Lift up your eyes ... the fields, for they are already white to harvest". You didn't sow for it, and will not even reap. But here is a soul here. She has just been converted, and she is off reaping.

J.S. So that their spiritual conception of it was not in line with it at all.

J.T. Quite so. They were putting it off. "Do not ye say, that there are yet four months ... ?" That is what the officials are apt to say. We are apt to say, 'Well, there is nothing much to do. We can do something else. All of us will go into the town to buy a little bread'. That is their attitude. That is what they say, 'It is four months ahead'. But He says, 'The harvest is already here'.

C.A.M. They were going by a calendar.

Rem. Very helpful. They would say, 'We have got to wait a certain time'. Today things are not done on that basis at all. So that nothing is done in a cut-and-dried manner.

J.T. No. John would bring in the living side of things. From the standpoint of administration, it is to be worked out from the persons who are the

objects of the administration. They immediately become part of the administration, and the official ones are set aside.

Rem. Would you say that Peter was helped in being in association with John? In Acts 3 he says to the lame man, "rise up and walk".

J.T. Quite so. He was ready there to reap the harvest.

C.A.M. Does this account for the Lord using an agricultural illustration here? It is not like commanding an army. He is speaking about agriculture.

Really, this is something we have to observe that is independent of us.

J.T. It is suggestive of life. The first suggestion of life in Genesis 1 was the agricultural side. And that is what John is dealing with here. There is the fruit; there it is, already there.

J.S. So that in the opening of the gospel we have, "In him was life ...". Now we see actual development. Is not the key seen in the will of God? My meat is to do the will of God.

J.T. Quite so. "He that doeth the will of God abideth for ever".

Rem. About our care meetings: is there not a tendency with us to put the things to be done on the behalf of appointment rather than on the behalf of those who are willing and ready to do them? When we appoint those to take charge of the gospel, or the money, or whatever it be, we must have a care meeting as to who they should be.

J.T. The point with John is that the work is to be done. Here is a person doing something she is not sent to do at all. Philip is not sent, he goes. So what she represents is the instinct that would lead a christian to do something because it needs to be done.

J.S. The point is to keep near to Christ.

J.T. Well, you can see how she gradually came on here. She says, "Art thou greater than our father

Jacob?" He had explained that He was greater. He had already said who He was, but she did not take it in. He did not answer that at all. He simply says, "Whosoever drinketh of this water shall thirst again: But whosoever drinketh of the water that I shall give him shall never thirst; but the water that I shall give him shall be in him a well of water springing up into everlasting life". Now He was dealing with her soul. That was the point. It is a question of grace, dealing with the need that is there. And therefore, she says, "Sir, give me this water". She is becoming interested. The Lord says, "Call thy husband". The moral side is dealt with. And then she begins to talk about worship. She had already said that He was a prophet. Now she is most interested and the Lord is deigning to talk to her about worship. And what we should see is that worship here is a question of the public position in the dispensation. It is not only that man is met in his need, but there is something for God. There must be return to God.

J.S. He had planted in her a well, making her a living fountain.

J.T. Quite so. And, I believe, that is why He deigns to speak to her about worship. All things are in the hands of the Son. He is administrator in the soul. The dispensation requires that God should have something. She is ready for that. And she says to the Lord, "I see that thou art a prophet". She is coming into the thing and seeing it. I wonder if everybody here sees that. There was no New Testament when she said this. That is the idea. And that is the reason why He deigns to speak about worship.

C.A.M. Do you not think it emphasises this matter of prophecy, and the great value of a prophet? It seems to be so stressed; and evidently is in view of worship.

J.T. Well, that brings up the whole question of

prophecy, our ministry meetings the Lord is helping the brethren on that point. I hope the brethren will go on with it. In the great prophetic book, Samuel, everyone in Israel knew he was a prophet. He is the characteristic prophet. And in the anointing of Saul what comes to light is the prophetic ministry. He says to Saul, 'You will meet a company and they will be prophesying, and you will do the same thing. You will come into the thing, too'. Saul was to come into the service. I believe that is the position.

J.S. Do we see that repeated here? The woman takes it on and goes into the city. There is nothing official. And her work is effective in the city.

J.T. Quite so. She told the Lord He was a prophet, and now she says, 'Do not you believe He is the Christ?' That is the idea of prophecy.

C.A.M. The stimulating thing about prophecy is that a wonderful range of things comes unexpectedly before you and you are delivered from a calendar altogether. It seems to dispense with all that sort of thing.

J.T. The basis of the Lord's remark about worship is prophecy. She is morally clothed.

Rem. The prophetic ministry must have its effect in our souls before we worship God.

J.T. That is the order.

J.S. Would you say the Lord cut across the Jewish calendar in order to bring to light the true worshippers?

J.T. That is the way it stands. We read in 1 Corinthians 14:23, "If therefore the whole assembly come together in one place, and all speak with tongues, and simple persons enter in, or unbelievers, will not they say ye are mad? But if all prophesy, and some unbeliever or simple person come in, he is convicted of all, he is judged of all; the secrets of his heart are manifested; and thus, falling upon his face, he will

do homage to God, reporting that God is indeed amongst you". There it is.

C.A.M. The eunuch went up to Jerusalem to worship, and when he got the prophetic word he was not able to do it.

J.T. Quite. He did not worship at Jerusalem.

A.F.M. Would you say that produces self-judgment?

J.T. Well, how can we worship God unless we fall down and judge ourselves? The Lord deigns to speak to her about things that we do not get anywhere else. She says to Him, "Our fathers worshipped in this mountain ...". Now, she had already said that He was a prophet, and the Lord deigns to take her on on this line of worship. "The hour cometh, and now is, when the true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth". That is the whole position as to worship, and He tells it to this woman.

C.A.M. In reference to the matter of the secrets of the heart being manifested, your connecting it to John 4 is very helpful.

J.T. Well, this is pure grace. The Lord was rising above what this woman was. She sees that He is a prophet.

C.A.M. That seems to be one of the great marks of a prophet. Jonah searched all Nineveh.

J.T. Quite so.

G.F. He "told me all things that ever I did". Does that refer to her life up to that point?

J.T. That was to bring out her whole history. She is like the man in Corinthians, and she falls down and does homage to God. I am only speaking of the actual state of her soul. He knew what was going on in her soul. She had already said that He was a prophet. She sees it. She has not read it out of Scripture.

C.A.M. Clearly she had worship before her. That is the matter she brings up.

W.N. We do not always seem to recognise the prophet. We might gain by recognising this.

J.T. The man in chapter 9 says, "He is a prophet". She tells Him,"I see that thou art a prophet". He was a Jew and she was a Samaritan.

Rem. And you could not have worship, really, until that takes place. I was thinking of 1 Samuel 10. The men prophesy, and it goes on to say, "And let it be, when these signs are come unto thee, that thou do as occasion serve thee; for God is with thee. And thou shalt go down before me to Gilgal; and, behold, I will come down unto thee, to offer burnt-offerings, and to sacrifice sacrifices of peace-offerings ...". That does not come in until after that.

J.T. Quite. It is a remarkable verse on this subject. It deals with this great prophetic subject. Samuel is one that is known to be a prophet from Dan to Beer-sheba.

E.P. Do you think it is a great point to acknowledge that I have no husband?

J.T. Quite so. You can see how the Lord became her husband. I believe that she represents "if Christ be in you", Romans 8:10. She had come to that. He was in her. She had nothing else to speak about. "Come, see a man who told me all things I had ever done: is not he the Christ?"

G.F. The Lord did not reprimand her. He says,"Go, call thy husband".

J.T. That is to bring out the state that she is in. One would just wonder how many of us can say truthfully, 'I see that'. Of course we have the Scriptures to read, but she did not. And she spoke of it. She turns round and becomes part of the administration.

J.S. Completely emptied, she now becomes a vessel of the Spirit.

J.T. Quite so.

E.S. Is not Abigail like that? I was thinking of how the disciples failed. Nabal, the official side was failing, and she came in unofficially taking things up.

J.T. She discerns David. "My lord", she says.

E.P. She was willing to admit that she had no husband. She came in for a new one.

J.T. Quite so.

A.F.M. Is that why you emphasise the prophetic side in our meetings for ministry?

J.T. That is the end of them if that is neglected. It is the prophetic side that is necessary. It will cause a sinner to fall down and do homage to God.

Rem. We may look for a prophetic word in any meeting.

J.T. It may come in in a meeting like this.

R.S. Is the homage in 1 Corinthians and the worship the same? I wanted some help on it. It is the highest word used in this section.

J.T. Well, it is the habitual word used. It is this very word used everywhere in the New Testament. It means prostration before God.

C.A.M. I suppose the reason we might be so poor in expressing ourselves to God, in some outpouring to God, is because God has not really come into the secrets of our hearts sufficiently.

J.T. The searching out of the inward parts is very important here. Because we call upon all that is within us. So in the types, in the sacrifices the inwards is so much stressed. It is the workings of the affections Godward.

N.W. It is to bring me before God, not only to bring God before me.

J.T. Yes. That is the effect of it. She confessed about her life. That was God coming into her soul.

But then she reverts back to that. God becomes her

object. The way God comes into my soul is the way grace has come into my soul. It is God made known in Christ. "Come, see a man". That is the new husband. "If Christ be in you, the body is dead on account of sin".

J.S. Would you see this earlier in Nathanael? The Lord says, "When thou wast under the fig-tree, I saw thee". He in principle falls down.

J.T. Well, he does. He says, "Thou art the Son of God; thou art the King of Israel".

Rem. Would you say the substance of Genesis 24 is seen in the servant of Abraham stooping and bowing down before Jehovah, and then you get the remnant of Rebecca's family willing to let her go? She was ready to go, as the object came into her soul.

J.T. Quite so. She finally comes into the thing herself. "Wilt thou go with this man?" When Isaac comes into view the man says, "That is my master". "If thou knewest ... who it is that says to thee, Give me to drink".

W.N. The thought of worship does not reach the standard it should. The prophetic ministry has not been attended to.

J.T. Well, those are the lines we all need at the present time, to make Himself everything.

W.N. So that prophetic ministry and worship go together?

J.T. Quite so.

R.S. "One God, the Father, of whom all things, and we for him". Is that worship?

J.T. That is right. "One Lord, Jesus Christ ... and we by him".

Rem. Prophetic ministry clears the ground.

J.T. Yes, it does.

J.S. The matter of bringing it right into the presence of the person -- is not that the point here?

J.T. Yes. Worship is induced. God comes before you.

W.N. I thought prophetic ministry was more than clearing away. It is a building up.

J.T. Well, yes. God is brought to us. So that in 1 Samuel 19 the prophets are prophesying and Samuel is presiding over them. It is being carried on in great power, so that Saul, a murderer, is brought under the power of it. I believe it is our great stay at the present time when the world is in apostasy.

It is our great stay. Saul comes into the power of it. He comes to take David and slay him, and in doing so he is exposed. Well, we should see how the official servants, the disciples, are not made much of, still the Lord says, "Lift up your eyes and behold the fields, for they are already white to harvest ... he that sows and he that reaps may rejoice together". What a beautiful thing that is, that you are reaping. He that reaps. Well, if the fields are white to harvest, why do not I reap? And you will gather fruit to life eternal. He that sows and he that reaps rejoice together, if you do what your hands find to do. Do not wait to be sent. If the harvest is there, reap it, and you will get life eternal; and then rejoicing together.

Rem. While it is true the Son was sent, He also comes. He came of Himself.

J.T. That is what comes out here. "My food is that I should do the will of him that has sent me, and that I should finish his work". He does not give up at all. The disciples were not doing it that day.

E.P. Do you think it brings you intimately into touch with the One who sowed? I was thinking of Paul and Silas in prison. Their hearts were touched by the One who had sowed in that field.

J.T. Yes. And they were rejoicing with Him. We must keep our eyes open for anything that God is doing and reap it.

Rem. We should not be behind the seasons. We may miss the whole thing.

C.A.M. Evidently the fruit was unexpected. The answer the prophet had to all his words -- the man shows up with the fruits of life.

J.T. When Naomi and Ruth came back to Bethlehem the reaping was going on. Paul speaks of the glad tidings of the blessed God.

THE ADMINISTRATIVE FEATURE OF CHRISTIANITY (2)

Romans 5:21; Hebrews 4:14 - 16; 1 Kings 7:6 - 8

J.T. The part of our subject occupying us last evening is found in the closing verses of John 3 and in chapter 4. The administrative side of the dispensation founded, as we noticed, in love. "The Father loves the Son, and has given all things to be in his hand". That is a great general statement covering the position. Then chapter 4 shows how the administration works out in those who are the objects of it. The woman of Samaria being representative of those who are serving, gradually comes to discern the Lord, saying, "I see that thou art a prophet". And she makes inquiry about worship, which the Lord deigns to take up and enlarge upon as if it is part of the great general position in the dispensation. That is, not only is man's need met but God's need is met in this present dispensation. The woman had a need, a great need. She had drunk deeply into this world, but thirsted again. The Lord speaks to her of water, that if one drinks of, he would never thirst. His need would be permanently met. It would be in him a fountain of water springing up into everlasting life, which would allude to his need completely met, and at the same time touching the need of God, so to speak. The divine need is seen in the Lord's remarks about worship. The Father seeks worshippers. So that the need of man and the need of God are both met in the dispensation. And then the woman goes to the men of the city and says, "Come, see a man which told me all things that ever I did: Is not this the Christ?" She becomes a vessel of use in the administration. She has already in principle drunk into the living water, and now gives it to others.

Chapter 7 shows the fulness of this in the rivers flowing out. But she became part of the administration in conveying the thought of God to the men of the city, indicating that Jesus was the Christ. She had said He was a prophet, now she intimates that He is the Christ. She is functioning in the administration and functioning effectively. For the men are affected by what she says. They say, having come to Jesus, "This is indeed the Saviour of the world". So that the administration works out in an ever-widening result in those who are the objects of it. They come into the thing, and their outlook is widened, in that they say, "This is indeed the Saviour of the world". And in relation to all that, we have the disciples, the only known servants of God, ostensibly, as called out by Christ. They are not doing anything to further the administration. They had gone into the city to buy bread. Apparently they all went, and the Lord was left alone. So that He opens up a word that covers their position. The harvest was already in view and they were not reaping. They said, "There are yet four months". But He says, "the fields ... are already white", the point being, inasmuch as there was a harvest, there should be reaping. It is a word to all of us who are ostensibly servants and how we should be putting our hands to the thing that needs to be done. What is in mind now is to work out the features by which the administration is maintained. It is thought that we might look at the throne, a feature of the house, and at a later reading the priesthood -- the advocacy of Christ. So that we will read first in Romans 5:21; Hebrews 4:14 - 16; 1 Kings 7:6 - 8.

We have to look at the throne as conveying divine authority toward us and then in view of the gracious rule that is exercised; and as having a great high priest, we are to view it as something to be approached, "with boldness ... that we may receive

mercy, and find grace for seasonable help". That is, the throne as it is effective in us in subduing us becomes such that the sense of grace enters into our souls and we have liberty of access to it as a throne of grace. Romans teaches us the kingdom in this sense "so also grace might reign through righteousness to eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord", Romans 5:21. The water given according to John 4 has the same end in view. That is, it springs up into eternal life. It is something in us. Here the reign is with a view of eternal life, too, because subjection is acquired. God is not blessing man in relation to his own will. He is blessing us in relation to the subduing of our wills. So that the passage in 1 Kings intimates that having made the throne room, the porch of judgment which stood in relation to the house in which Solomon dwelt, "he made, like to this porch, a house for Pharaoh's daughter". The house where she dwelt was made like the porch. So that judgment -- the will of God through judgment through the throne -- is effective in the assembly. We have been subjected to the Christ. So there is the disallowance automatically of all our wills. The position of the assembly is subjection to Christ and where she dwells there is everything to denote that her house is according to the porch of judgment. So that that being understood there should be no exercise of our wills, particularly in the things of God. Whatever is manifestly of God is to be submitted to and acted upon, and if it requires sacrifice, sacrifice is to be made, so that it might be acted upon.

C.A.M. I suppose Matthew's gospel shows how necessary judgment is in connection with administration. That gospel seems to emphasise judgment.

J.T. Yes. Say a little more about that.

C.A.M. I thought it would be in line with this matter of judgment. I was impressed with it. I think we are conscious of it, that in connection with

this wonderful administration, this matter of judgment seems to be a very important one.

J.T. I am sure it is important. The reference to it here in 1 Kings 7:6 - 8, "And he made the porch of pillars; its length was fifty cubits, and its breadth thirty cubits; and there was a porch in front of them; and there were pillars, and steps in front of them. And he made the porch for the throne where he judged, the porch of judgment; and it was covered with cedar from floor to floor. And his house where he dwelt had another court within the porch, which was of the like work. And he made, like to this porch, a house for Pharaoh's daughter, whom Solomon had taken". I think that the gospel of Matthew is very much like the house made for Pharaoh's daughter. It is made like the porch of judgment.

C.A.M. That helps us to understand why the assembly is treated of in such a remarkable way.

J.T. Well, she is to be heard in matters of judgment. She exercises judgment. Her house is of that kind, where she dwells.

Ques. What do you think the porch of judgment is as connected with Solomon's own house?

J.T. That would be to connect where he dwells, too. So that 1 and 2 Corinthians work out the idea in the assembly. The assembly here has become part of the administration of judgment, as learning subjection. As I learn subjection, I become authoritative. As the assembly learns subjection she becomes authoritative. If I am lawless, I have no moral weight with others.

C.A.M. Yes. That is striking about 1 and 2 Corinthians. So that they both issue in life. I suppose that would be the outcome of all this.

J.T. Quite so. The throne looks out into eternal life. None of the blessing is attached to us in insubjection.

Ques. Do you regard the Lord's word to the

disciples in John 4 as to their will? "My meat is to do the will of him that sent me".

J.T. That is the line we are speaking of.

Ques. Were they outside of the will of God in what they were doing?

J.T. I think they were. They could not have been in the will of God because they left the Lord alone. He is carrying on alone.

Rem. To take an indifferent attitude in relation to divine matters is bordering on this matter of looseness and will.

J.T. Well, I think the throne is taken up in John 14 in connection with the remnant position, although the dispensation began with it. He says, "If ye love me, keep my commandments. And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter". "If a man love me, he will keep my words". "He that hath my commandments, and keepeth them, he it is that loveth me". I think the throne enters into all that, because the throne is a symbol of the divine will. It implies that God not only has a will, but He has the means of enforcing it. So that much is made of Solomon's throne. And the prophetic word as to it is that it can be beautifully tempered. So that there can be no complaint of harshness. It said of the king prophetically in Deuteronomy 17:14 - 20: "When thou comest unto the land which Jehovah thy God giveth thee, and shalt possess it, and shalt dwell therein, and shalt say, I will set a king over me, like all the nations that are about me; thou shalt only set him king over thee whom Jehovah thy God will choose: from among thy brethren shalt thou set a king over thee; thou mayest not set a foreigner over thee, who is not thy brother. Only he shall not multiply horses to himself, nor lead back the people to Egypt, to multiply horses; for Jehovah hath said unto you, Ye shall not return again any more that way. Neither shall

he multiply wives to himself, that his heart turn not away; neither shall he greatly multiply to himself silver and gold. And it shall be, when he sitteth upon the throne of his kingdom, that he shall write for himself a copy of this law in a book out of that which is before the priests, the Levites; and it shall be with him, and he shall read therein all the days of his life; that he may learn to fear Jehovah his God, to keep all the words of this law and these statutes, to do them; that his heart be not lifted up above his brethren, and that he turn not aside from the commandment, to the right hand, or to the left; that he may prolong his days in his kingdom, he, and his sons, in the midst of Israel". I think in these verses we have prescribed what only finds a full answer in Christ. And when Solomon did reign he had this throne, a great throne, and a porch, which has a link with his dwelling-place, and Pharaoh's daughter's dwelling-place. So that the idea of rule is through the throne, permeating all.

E.S. Is there not safety to us under this rule?

J.T. That is right. There was no adversary or evil occurrent.

C.A.M. Will you tell us about this matter of the king. It looks forward to Solomon's day and is fully seen in Christ. At the present time, this matter of kingly rule in the assembly, how do you look at that?

J.T. Well, there must be rule.

C.A.M. What I meant was this: are we right in any way applying this to princely features amongst the saints, in connection with a royal priesthood?

J.T. I think it works out in connection with the princes. We get, generally, the thought that there must be rule. So that we see it in the universe. Everything is regulated by law or principle. The whole physical system hangs together that way. Well, God establishes a moral system that emanates from Himself. Then there must be rule. We are told

a king shall reign in righteousness, princes shall rule in judgment (Isaiah 32:1). So that the Lord in Matthew takes His seat on the mount. His genealogy comes down, so as to establish that He is of the royal line, Son of David, Son of Abraham. He takes His seat on the mount, and the disciples came to Him, and He sat down and taught them. There are several mountains in Matthew. This is the mount of authority. "I say unto thee".

So that Jerusalem is the city of the great King. Pharaoh's daughter is brought in. He is the true Solomon, and Pharaoh's daughter is brought in as type of the assembly, in chapter 18, where she is to be appealed to. So that judgment works out from Christ, His throne, to the assembly. And hence she becomes a great agency in the administration.

A.F.M. We are exhorted in chapter 18 to tell it to the assembly. That would be, typically, Pharaoh's daughter. Then as you read further, the porch for Pharaoh's daughter comes last in this section, as if the work of administration were so far executed that it could be faithfully placed in her hands.

J.T. That is important. It all works down into the assembly, into the hands of those who are patterned after Christ; and we see in the coming world of glory that she is the great centre and all law and rule radiates from her. She is learning now.

E.P. "Ye ... have obeyed from the heart the form of teaching into which ye were instructed", Romans 6:17. Do the roots of this lie there?

J.T. Yes. The form of teaching was obeyed from the heart.

E.P. I was thinking as you read Deuteronomy that the features of subjection are seen in the One who sat on the throne.

J.T. Quite so. Romans is to work out that principle. The principle of obedience is the basis of anyone of us coming into rule.

R.S. Does the authority given the overcomer in Thyatira with regard to the iron rod work today in the assembly?

J.T. Well, exactly. The rod that the Lord uses to shepherd the nations. It is a benign, flexible rule, although it is severe. It is a rule that will not tolerate our wills. It is a benign rule, but there is nothing to legalise my will. The best way I can serve anyone is to overthrow his will. And, I believe, that is what is meant. "To him will I give authority over the nations, and he shall shepherd them with an iron rod". It is a benign thing. It carries out the thought of shepherding. He commended that to Peter. But there must be no toleration of our wills. So that it says in chapter 12 that the male son should shepherd all the nations with an iron rod. It is no act of friendliness or kindness to anyone to legalise his will, or whether he can do this or that. The iron means that wills go. But at the same time, love is behind it. I want to shepherd everybody in what I am doing.

J.S. So that the idea of shepherding would be completed.

Rem. And John 14 would be in keeping with the iron rod. "He that has my commandments and keeps them ...". It is like the iron rod.

J.T. Yes. So that you can understand the rod being connected with the remnant in Thyatira. It represents that part of the church's history which is connected with man's will recognised in religion. The Vatican represents the greatest organisation that there ever has been. It is a growth of centuries and human learning and experience made to serve this thing. So that man's will rules instead of God's will. There is nothing benign about Rome's will. God says, 'My will is not any more flexible, but My will will be exercised to shepherd people'. The Pope is sitting in the chair of St. Peter. The symbol of office represents that shepherd service. But there is nothing

of the shepherd in it. But the overcomer is given to rule or shepherd the nations with a rod of iron. The assembly is shepherding us all the time, though it will not allow our wills. The principle of eldership is to shepherd the sheep.

Ques. Would you say that it was a very serious matter when Jehoshaphat let down the thought of administration for the moment in allying his throne with that of Ahab?

J.T. Very good, indeed. There were two imposing thrones and the servant of God has to face all that. And he asserts the throne of God. He says, "I saw the Lord sitting on his throne", 1 Kings 22:19. That is the one that prevails.

R.W.S. What is broken in pieces? It goes on to say, "as vessels of pottery are they broken in pieces, as I also have received from my Father".

J.T. Well, the shepherd is the point. We have to exercise rule of course. "In the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, when ye are gathered together, and my spirit, with the power of our Lord Jesus Christ, To deliver such an one unto Satan for the destruction of the flesh, that the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus", 1 Corinthians 5:4, 5. That is bringing up the flesh, but it is that the man's spirit might be saved. He is really being shepherded. If anyone were to go to him and say, 'Well, I think it was too severe', he would say, 'You are no friend of mine, because the shepherding was for the salvation of my spirit'.

A.N.W. What is saved must be subdued according to 1 Corinthians 15. And then the Son Himself will be placed in subjection.

J.T. Does it not say that everything is subdued? So that the throne of God has got the whole power of God behind it, and can never be overcome. But you are exercised with a view of everlasting life. God has nothing but blessing in mind, however severe it may be.

Rem. Would Psalm 89 bear out what you say? "Righteousness and judgment are the foundation of thy throne". And then in verse 29, "I will establish his seed for ever, and his throne as the days of heaven. If his sons forsake my law and walk not in mine ordinances ... Then will I visit their transgression with the rod, and their iniquity with stripes", Psalm 89:29 - 32.

J.T. I am glad you called attention to that because it is a psalm of a very wise man. But not as wise as Solomon. Solomon was wiser. It shows that there was no rivalry or envy with him in the way he spoke of David. For he spoke of David in the main. It is one of the psalms of instruction, that we are to learn from. He is eulogising. He is speaking in the highest terms of the throne of David. All this enters into it. So that we may well observe what is said as you read it there.

-.McC. I may be conscious that I am in the assembly but it necessitates my being subject to its authority. Judgment begins at the house of God.

J.T. Judgment there is not by the house of God. In Matthew it is by the house of God, that is, by the assembly. But Peter deals with the government of God, and he says it will begin there. Conditions would require that it should begin there, God judging amongst His people. "God is greatly to be feared in the assembly of the saints".

E.P. Would the porch of pillars suggest the maintenance of divine principles?

J.T. I think they do. They are distinct things to be observed. Your attention is called by the appearance of a pillar. So I think it is said there are steps. "He made the porch of pillars ... and there were pillars, and steps in front of them". The idea is, apparently, that they were approachable. They are not beyond us. So that all are within our range -- all these things. And there can be no doubt that the

result of the working out of Pharaoh's daughter's house in Matthew and 2 Corinthians is not destruction but blessing.

E.P. Do you think the pillars would suggest that there is that around the throne that corresponds to it? Paul says, "set those to judge who are little esteemed in the assembly".

J.T. Well, he has come into the system. As I am subject myself to the laws of the kingdom, I become a ruler. "He that ruleth his spirit" is better "than he that taketh a city". Matthew requires that. I have influence over other people if I am subject myself. I have moral weight with others. And so we make disciples. So that you get a person as least esteemed in the assembly -- let him be set over this thing. He is equal to the Supreme Court in Washington. He is capable of judging between brother and brother. I do not believe the ablest Chief Justice could adjudicate amongst the brethren. He that is least esteemed in the assembly -- he can adjudicate between brother and brother.

C.A.M. As we come under this influence we are able to assert it ourselves. In the cross we get that princely condition. When it came to the cross, the Lord was princely in those surroundings. I meant that the most insignificant of us in coming near the Lord could become princely.

J.T. I am sure. So that we had yesterday how great a person a disciple is in Matthew -- giving a cup of cold water in the name of a disciple. It is not that we want to deify one another, but to bring out the moral idea in judgment. If a man rules his own spirit he is better than he that takes a city; and he is qualified for a place in the house of administration.

R.M. Do you think that these pillars would preclude any thought of party spirit? They stood by themselves. They were governed by party spirit in

Corinth. These pillars stood in relation to each other by themselves.

J.T. That is a good remark. There were pillars and steps in front of them. They would represent principles. They would be approachable, accessible. They would certainly preclude all party action. They were viewed each in his distinction.

Ques. Why is it that the idea of being spiritual or a prophet as a result of keeping the commandments that Paul was speaking of, comes in at the end of the verses that deal with prophetic ministry?

J.T. You refer to 1 Corinthians 14. Well, that is a test of spirituality. "If any one thinks himself to be a prophet or spiritual, let him recognise the things that I write to you, that it is the Lord's commandment". That is the test. The commandment is recognised.

Rem. So that I can begin to see the place that the prophetic ministry has on the road to worship. But in between there must be this question of obedience come to light. I was thinking of what may appear to operate in a word of ministry. In the beginning of Ezra it speaks of the word of Jehovah by the mouth of Jeremiah. The children of Israel might have forgotten that word. God did not forget it. These things must be part and parcel of the whole system.

J.T. Quite. So that the Old Testament closes with a direct statement as to Sinai, where this principle of the throne and rule began. "Remember the law of Moses my servant, which I commanded unto him in Horeb for all Israel". That is laid down as unalterable. And then, "Behold, I send unto you Elijah the prophet", Malachi 4. I think the Lord is constantly reminding us of this matter of prophecy.

Rem. I was wondering if the steps might connect with the prophetic side. That is, on the road to seeing the great pillars and entering the place where judgment

is actually accomplished. Or is that carrying the thought too far?

J.T. Entering into the place of judgment?

Rem. Yes. There are the steps up, which are evidently in front of the pillars, then the porch, then the throne. And what leads me to this would be prophetic ministry.

J.T. Well, the mind of God comes out in prophetic ministry. And, as is clear, the obedience must be present if we are to come into blessing. There must be submission.

C.A.M. I think your reference to the end of the Old Testament is very good because this matter of the prophet was really making way for the throne. And then it refers to the hearts of the fathers being turned to the children, and the hearts of the children to their fathers. This heart-searching matter seems to be emphasised.

J.T. Quite. To have our hearts turned to our children. To have a right heart toward those who are to be influenced.

A.F.M. The reference you have made to 1 Corinthians 14 shows that a prophet was a spiritual person.

The great qualification would be that, to learn and give the mind of God. And such a person would recognise that this first epistle was the Lord's commandment. Now, evidently there were those who took the place of being prophets who were not doing that.

J.T. That is it. If I am a minister in any way, or assume to be spiritual, I must recognise the Lord's commandments. I surely ought to be able to do that.

Ques. Do you think that verse 38 which says, "But if any be ignorant, let him be ignorant" would apply to persons who disregard the word? It is not a question of inadvertent ignorance.

J.T. It is a very remarkable word, and links on to Revelation where you get final judgment which is

unalterable or irrevocable. This links on with 1 Corinthians 16:22, where the apostle says, "If any man love not the Lord Jesus Christ, let him be Anathema Maranatha". That would be final when the Lord came. But here he would go further. Here he says, "If any be ignorant, let him be ignorant". Why should that be? That is a very sad thing. It is like apostasy in Hebrews. It is a fixed thing. It is impossible to renew such an one again to repentance. He had tasted of the good word of God and the power of it. He had tasted christianity with all its blessed features, and is calmly giving it up. It is impossible to renew him again to repentance. Let him be ignorant. That would be justice. It links on with Revelation. "Let the filthy make himself filthy still". God says, 'I am going to leave that. That is going on to final judgment'. That is a most solemn thing. I cannot allow my will because we never know when He will say that about me. We cannot point out a person and say that. It is something God knows.

Rem. If it is an issue in the assembly, and the light of the matter is clearly shown and constantly shown, and a person says, 'Well, I do not see it', it may be that they do not want to see it. Any one of us doing that kind of thing may be on the road to this.

J.T. Well, it is a solemn fact. If I persistently refuse the light, God may say, 'Let him be ignorant still'. Things happen, and you have to leave them.

Rem. When you sit next to a person who says he wants light, and you turn on the light, so to speak, and he still does not see it -- would this be equivalent to the lack of the understanding heart you get in Isaiah?

J.T. The solemn fact is that I may go on with my own will, and God may leave it at that. There is such a thing as that.

Rem. Is there a point where I cannot take it in any longer?

J.T. There is such a thing as that. "If any be ignorant, let him be ignorant".

J.S. "If therefore the light that is in thee be darkness, how great the darkness!"

R.W.S. I would like to ask if an assembly judgment can be wrong.

J.T. You can answer that as well as I. You know that an assembly judgment can be wrong, and can be reversed. Leviticus 4 provides for that. So that the assembly can be cleared of the evil.

G.F. I wish you would go into that, the remark in regard to the reversing of an assembly judgment.

J.T. Well, if a thing is wrong, it is wrong. If all the assemblies in the world committed a judgment of it and it was wrong, it would still be wrong. God makes me feel that it is right by His presence. It helps me, like a covenant from God. It is to help me in my weakness, but I ought not to need that. If it is right, it is right; if it is wrong, it is wrong.

Rem. And so the house of Pharaoh's daughter is not really displaying the idea of the porch of Solomon as of the throne. It says in Leviticus 4, "if ... they have done somewhat against any of the commandments of the Lord concerning things which should not be done, and are guilty ...".

J.T. Yes, that chapter makes a gracious provision for it. So that an assembly or a priest or an individual should be released from the effect of it. It is a gracious provision.

C.A.M. That is what seems to make it so important that the kingly or princely element amongst us should retain these commandments -- write them, keep them, and read them.

J.T. Well, I was thinking of that. The king was to make a copy of the law for himself. The priests are ordinarily the custodians of the law, but here is a man who makes a copy for himself. He is in a special place of responsibility.

C.A.M. And that thing is existent and will be existent until we do not need it any longer.

J.T. Quite.

A.N.W. That is the standard.

J.T. Well, that brings up another matter. We must bow under what is right. And I am responsible to know what is right. Anyone can assert his will, otherwise. The door is open for a million judgments. I saw a letter carefully written the other day, in which the writer said that the brethren, of course, could only act according to their understanding of the matter. But is their understanding right? The law that the king writes for himself is the standard. My judgment is not the thing at all. There is such a thing as right. And I am responsible to know that. So that unless we bow to that, the door is open to everybody having his own will. Is it not possible for brethren to say, 'That is right'? And if I dissent I am bound morally to show why -- to show that there is something defective in it. If I cannot I am out of accord with all divine system. Why are you not satisfied? Can you not tell us? If you cannot tell us, say nothing and bow.

A.S. So that having diverse judgments is nothing but Open Brethrenism.

J.T. Quite so. And that is what the enemy is seeking to do, that is the level that the enemy is constantly endeavouring to bring in amongst us -- that I have a right to my own judgment.

Rem. If a brother says, 'I do not just go with that judgment', that brother is really out of fellowship though he is still breaking bread.

J.T. He is not functioning as to the system, if it is the assembly. That is in accord with the porch of judgment. I want to function in relation to the throne. And I must understand the throne. The will of God is to be understood.

R.W.S. That makes Josiah's action a spiritual

one -- when the book of the law is found, and all that follows.

J.T. Well, exactly. How he was affected by it! Now we ought to look a little at our approach to the throne. "Having therefore a great high priest who has passed through the heavens, Jesus the Son of God, let us hold fast the confession. For we have not a high priest not able to sympathise with our infirmities, but tempted in all things in like manner, sin apart. Let us approach therefore with boldness to the throne of grace, that we may receive mercy, and find grace for seasonable help". This is another side of the matter that we ought to understand, the idea of approach. I am not terrorised by it.

J.S. Does the fact that sin having reigned and given place to the reign of grace, give rise to this?

J.T. That is the thought. Sin has reigned, now God has set up a throne that is grace. And sin is not to have dominion over us because we are not under the law but grace, with eternal life in view. Hebrews takes up the throne in this way in relation to the great high priest who has passed through the heavens.

Having Him I can draw near to that. Here it is the throne. I have learned the power of grace in my soul. So that whatever need I have got I can ask. I can draw near with boldness. When Esther drew near she had to stand outside until the king held up the sceptre. But here you use boldness. The more liberty you take the better.

W.N. The approach points toward the subjugation of my will.

J.T. Well, unless my will is subdued I cannot draw near. The thought of iron is there, too.

A.N.W. Mercy in need, and faithfulness when we need subduing.

J.T. Yes, indeed. The idea of faithfulness must be always present. Even though I am subdued, I

must search my heart lest there be a selfish thought there.

C.A.M. This great priest was really on the throne.

It says that it is Jesus, the Son of God. As if there was not a single object to deter us.

J.T. Quite so. It says He is sitting as a priest upon His throne.

A.F.M. So that the affections are set. "Let us approach therefore with boldness to the throne of grace, that we may receive mercy, and find grace for seasonable help". Grace is enthroned and if we approach, we prove the value of it.

J.T. Yes. We get the sense of who the Person is, that great High Priest. The official side is in mind here. He has passed through the heavens. Creatures cannot pass through the heavens. The third is the limit for the creature. But here is One who has passed through the heavens, that is an assertion of the Lord's deity. A well-known Man, Jesus the Son of God, has passed through the heavens. His deity is asserted. His qualifications are that He is able to sympathise with our infirmities, being tempted in all things in like manner, sin apart. That is, His moral quality is seen here. His deity is that He passed through the heavens; His official place is as great High Priest, His relationship is as Jesus, Son of God; His moral quality is that He was tempted in every way as we are, sin apart. "Which of you convinces me of sin?" That is His moral quality down here.

We need not be afraid. He knows us well.

R.W.S. Is the covenant linked on with this? Is it distinctive, or is that to aid me in boldness?

J.T. You get the idea in chapter 8, and then the idea of approach in chapter 10: 19 -- it is in the power of that covenant that we draw near. It is a question of drawing near to God. We are dealing here with the throne, and Him who has to do with it. He has gone beyond the heavens. That is His deity. But as to

His personal relationship, He is Jesus, the Son of God; and morally, tempted in everything, sin apart. The nearer you get to Him, the more you feel how sympathetic He is. He is there to encourage us. But will will never be brooked.

Rem. When Peter said, "Depart from me", he really did not understand this. It was not the line of departing, was it?

J.T. Quite so. But still, he fell down at Jesus' knees. Instinctively, he felt that that Person was gracious. He discerned that He was a priest.

C.A.M. Yes. It is remarkable that the priest senses the person, not the words. He understood Peter better than he understood himself.

J.T. I suppose Peter would be the best to tell us about it -- his life history -- how he had to do with Jesus. I would love to have heard him. I can understand Paul staying fifteen days with Peter. I think a young person should get as near as he can to persons knowing Jesus.

Ques. Was that the beginning of Acts 15?

J.T. That was earlier. He stayed there fifteen days. He could tell him about Jesus. Of course, Paul knew Jesus, but not in the sense that Peter knew Him. Peter had such breakdowns.

E.P. Paul could say the same thing. I obtained mercy because I did the thing ignorantly in unbelief.

J.T. Quite so. But he did not know Him in the peculiar way in which Peter knew Him. The Lord entered into his house first according to Luke. Luke gives you the priest. The Lord came into his house and his mother-in-law was ill. His mother-in-law got the blessing, but he did not.

E.P. Would you say that the priesthood is connected with what He is as Man?

J.T. Oh, yes. A Son is priest. Sonship implies manhood. Peter missed it. His mother-in-law got the blessing, but he missed it. It was in his boat he

got the blessing, according to Luke. Luke would emphasise Peter's relation with the priest. It says of him, "he fell down at Jesus' knees". He had a consciousness that that Man cared for him.

-.McC. You would be impressed with the holding fast in chapter 4: 14. It necessitates my seeing the great high priest. I must have that good in my soul to be able to hold fast. It requires power.

J.T. Yes. It is holding fast to your confession. That is not my opinion, it is the confession -- what is manifestly the truth of God.

Ques. What did you mean when you said He sympathises with our infirmities and not our wills?

J.T. Well, that is manifest. That is what the iron rod means. It is inflexible in regard to our wills, but it is shepherding all the time. He says, 'I know your feelings and I am ready to shepherd you. I have been there Myself. I sympathise with you'. "For we have not a high priest not able to sympathise with our infirmities, but tempted in all things in like manner, sin apart. Let us approach therefore with boldness to the throne of grace, that we may receive mercy, and find grace for seasonable help".

A.N.W. Being able to exercise forbearance.

J.T. Quite so. Well, our time is up, but perhaps the brethren will follow along better if it be suggested that we pursue this subject tomorrow in connection with priesthood. It is a question of how the administration is to be maintained, and how we are to be maintained in it. So that the last subject would be priesthood, but more particularly, advocacy; both as applied to the Lord in heaven and the Spirit here below. It is the same thought. It is four times applied to the Spirit in John's gospel; once applied to Christ in John's first epistle.

G.F. Do we approach the throne as an individual?

J.T. It is the individual that is in mind. I should not exclude the thought from our meetings for prayer.

N.W. How do you understand, "tempted in all things"?

J.T. Well, just as it states. All things with which we are tempted. What the enemy uses to tempt us, to induce us to give up the confession. The enemy sought to induce Jesus to give up His confession -- to divert Him from God and bring Him around under his own influence.

C.A.M. Quite so. That is what comes up. "If thou be the Son of God" -- twice it comes up in that connection.

THE ADMINISTRATIVE FEATURE OF CHRISTIANITY (3)

Hebrews 2:16 - 18; Hebrews 5:5 - 10; Hebrews 7:26 - 28; 1 John 2:1, 2; John 14:15 - 17

J.T. Our subject is the administrative feature of christianity, and how it is to be maintained. Priesthood and advocacy have a large part in the maintenance of the administration. They are, indeed, part of it. We will read Hebrews 2:16 - 18; Hebrews 5:5 - 10; Hebrews 7:26 - 28; 1 John 2:1, 2; John 14:15 - 17.

This scripture in John 14 is added because it links the Holy Spirit with our subject, the word 'comforter' being the same as 'advocate' in John's epistle. But the first part to be considered is the priesthood. We mentioned yesterday, in relation to Hebrews 4, the boldness of access which we have to the throne of grace. The high priesthood of Christ stands in relation to the house, the throne. So that it was brought in yesterday, but the thought is to look at it more extensively, and to see how the Lord's priesthood sustains the house of administration. And what helps in the types is that the Lord is seen in Exodus 21 in the exercise of love, in the type of the Hebrew bondman. Jehovah had said "them that love me" in chapter 20 and in chapter 21 we have this type of Christ as showing love. It is said, "we have known love, because he has laid down his life for us". So that we have One saying, "I love". And when He says that we look for the way of love. We are to serve one another by love, and love enters into the subject of priesthood peculiarly. It is fundamental with regard to this subject, as it is fundamental with regard to the great subject of administration. "The Father loveth the Son". Here it is the Son loving the Father. "I love my master, my wife, and my

children". So that we have the way of love introduced in the type after we are notified that there are lovers of God. We have One who says, "I love", and then we have the way of it. He laid down His life for us. And we are to lay down our lives for the brethren. That is the way of it. Hence the bondman accepts death in type. His ear is bored through, alluding to his intelligence. Hebrews says He was heard in that He feared. Priesthood implies manhood. Manhood is fully seen in servitude. It is a question of what is heard. So that his ear is bored at the door-post, and he professes to abide a servant for ever. Then in chapter 28 He introduces Christ as again seen, not as a bond-slave but as a priest, One who would serve in a more dignified way. So it is not to serve Me as a slave, but as priest. And that raises another question which leads us back earlier in Exodus. The service is to be by the son. "Let my son go". When the actual service is to be performed God's request is for the priest. The sons of Aaron are included as well as Aaron. They are to be robed in a dignified way for this service. And that is what Hebrews takes up.

C.A.M. It is an interesting matter about the ear, and the being heard. You were connecting the digging of the ear with hearing.

J.T. Quite so. That is the meaning of Psalm 40. 'Ears halt thou digged', alluding suggestively to incarnation. Becoming incarnate, the Son was here, taking the place of hearing. Satan would take Him out of that position. But the Lord says that "Man shall not live by bread alone but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God". It is a question of the ear being ready to hear what God has to say.

C.A.M. Yes. The priests have to do a lot of speaking. It would seem to follow that.

J.T. Yes. And he was to hear. The anointing included the ear, particularly corresponding with the boring of the ear.

A.N.W. Would the service of bondman be up to the brazen altar and the service of priest from there on?

J.T. That is good. Of course, we have here the actual service at the altar, connecting with priesthood. That is, that He might be a merciful and faithful high priest to make propitiation for the sins of the people, in that He Himself has suffered. He suffered on the altar. He was the offering priest. As you touch the altar you come to the priestly side.

He was a bond-slave entirely devoted to the will of God, even unto death.

A.N.W. He offered Himself without spot unto God.

Rem. What did you have in your mind when you spoke of the thought of the son underlying Exodus?

J.T. Well, the word to Pharaoh was, "Let my son go, that he may serve me". That is the primary thought of God. But when God asks for a servant He does not use the word 'son', he uses the word 'priest', pointing to the fact that we are still in an environment that is marked by evil and the exercise of will, and that is what priesthood is for, that God might be served under these conditions. It suggests one who hears. So that the Lord says He does not do anything of Himself. What He sees the Father doing He does. The Father reveals everything to Him. It is only on the principle of hearing. He does not speak of Himself. He emanates from God; and hence priesthood involves training and instruction. Not that the Lord needed this. He knew all. But He knew man's place; and everything emanates from God through Him.

A.F.M. Do tell us why in Hebrews 10, Psalm 40 is translated to mean "a body hast thou prepared me" instead of, 'ears hast thou digged for me'.

J.T. Well, that would be equivalent. How does the psalm read?

A.F.M. Psalm 40:6, "Sacrifice and oblation thou didst not desire: ears hast thou prepared me". I think that is translated in Hebrews, "A body hast thou prepared me". Does that emphasise the thought that He had taken that place? The whole body was set for hearing.

J.T. That is it. The ear being bored or digged or hollowed out -- the language is to convey thoughts. These words 'digged' or 'hollowed out' mean simply that the Lord took a body, took a bondman's form, took on humanity. And He says to the devil, in manhood, "Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God". So in the prophet He says, "He wakeneth morning by morning, he wakeneth mine ear to hear as the instructed. The Lord Jehovah hath opened mine ear", Isaiah 50:4, 5. It is a remarkable thing that the Lord should take such an attitude, and it ought to appeal to us, that we might speak a word in season.

N.W. "God ... has spoken to us in the person of the Son".

J.T. Quite so. Over against the prophets, here is One here who has the feelings of a man. So that there, in the first chapter of the epistle, it is to bring out who the Speaker is. "God ... at the end of these days has spoken to us in the person of the Son". The article is omitted in the original to show that it is a divine Person in sonship. "By whom also he made the worlds", and he goes on to speak of His greatness. But in chapter 2 He is on our side. And so it says, "For he does not indeed take hold of angels by the hand, but he takes hold of the seed of Abraham. Wherefore it behoved him in all things to be made like to his brethren, that he might be a merciful and faithful high priest in things relating to God, to make propitiation for the sins of the people; for, in that himself has suffered, being tempted, he is

able to help those that are being tempted", Hebrews 2:16 - 18. Now we have Him on our side with feelings like our own, sin apart. So that He can sympathise with us. And I think that the ears being digged alludes to incarnation. John used it properly when he said, "the Word became flesh". That is incarnation; the Word becoming flesh. But the psalm would stress the hearing, taking the position where He hears. So that God has One here great enough to convey all His thoughts, but feeling enough to sympathise with us as hearing the things.

E.P. Would there be any connection between the thought of digging and hollowing out and learning obedience by the things which He suffered?

J.T. Well, there is a link there. How entirely human He was! He learned obedience. The learning is experimental. God cannot be said to experience obedience because He is not man. But Christ became Man, and experienced obedience. So that He learned from the things which He suffered, and then it adds, "having been heard because of his piety". He was a pious Man, infinitely so. Yet God accredits Him with it and gives Him a hearing. But the great thought in His having an ear is that He should hear God. So that it comes to us first of all in the Son, and then in One who can be touched with the feelings of our infirmities.

Ques. Is the idea behind this priestly administration that we should take on the same features?

J.T. That is the intent. That is, you come into the benefits of the thing, the benefits of the priesthood.

Rem. I was wondering if you would get an exemplification of the practical working out of this in Paul's approach to the Corinthians. He was as a workman amongst them. He associated with them, and was able to help them in that way.

J.T. Yes, that is good. You get to know what people are by associating with them. Jonah entered

a day's journey into the city to know what kind of place it was. And then he cried. Paul worked as a tradesman in Corinth. He had come to know what was there. So that divine help comes to persons through one that knows them. As much as to say, I have been through the thing, and I can see that you deserve this. The principle is there. How perfect it was in Christ. As becoming Man, He moved about in this world and saw it as it was, and speaks accordingly.

Rem. That makes a prophetic word all the more solemn.

J.T. Quite so. One thing in ministering is to know the people you are ministering to, what they have to contend with, what their environment is. So that Paul makes more of that in regard of Corinth. He determined not to know anything among them save Jesus Christ and Him crucified. Divine communications come through the man that knows.

G.D. This priesthood is available to the seed of Abraham. What kind of persons are they characteristically?

J.T. It is to bring out the human side, I suppose; taking hold of the seed of Abraham. It was already sanctified. The Lord did not come into corrupt humanity. It was the seed of Abraham, already sanctified. He was "holy, harmless, undefiled". The incarnation was infinitely pure. I suppose He takes up the seed of Abraham in that connection.

Mary was on that line, and she is taken up. Joseph, too. The seed of Abraham has a place spiritually.

It is not corrupt humanity. God knows how to take up something. The seed is there -- holy seed.

J.S. Is it characteristically those called out?

J.T. I suppose so. It is not the ordinary corrupt humanity of Sodom. It is what already has been prepared. He has come in in that way.

Rem. Like Romans 4. Those that are of Abraham,

on that line of father, whether they be gentile or Jew. Or are you confining it to the Jew?

J.T. Well, here it is the seed of Abraham. It alludes to Mary, the Lord's mother. The word in Matthew is a unique word. "The book of the generation of Jesus Christ, the son of David, the son of Abraham". It is a unique word. Not the ordinary word at all. It alludes to that kind of generation.

Jesus was seen at the end of the line. God looked at that line, and took care of it in that way. You can see how important that is. "Of whom was born Jesus". Mary was His mother, and Joseph was His reputed father. It is a line under divine care, but still as human as any.

Rem. Is that why you get the generations in Matthew?

J.T. Yes. Everything is divinely handled and certain ones are eliminated, so that the line is kept pure.

Rem. And as you were saying, He is at the end of the line.

J.T. It shows how the line was under God's eye; and then the Lord's conception and birth. Luke gives you that side. He shows how it is preserved, how holy everything was. "The holy thing", meaning that it was substantially holy.

C.A.M. So that humanity in the mind of God seems to impress you with the fact that it is preserved all the way through; whatever journeys, from this place to that place; and eventually to Christ.

Ques. Is it a creational view of humanity, or based on humanity?

J.T. We are created of God. That never applies to Christ. He is not a creature at all. He is a Son, though.

N.W. "In all things to be made like to his brethren", does not suggest union with humanity.

J.T. No. He has taken on humanity, but thus cared for.

W.B. Does God introduce the family line with Abraham -- a special thing?

J.T. Quite so. That is the reason he is given the name 'father'. He is first called 'high father', meaning that he is morally dignified. God made him that. He would not be ashamed to be called his God.

A.N.W. You were saying, while there are some shut out, there are some brought in.

J.T. Those who have manifested the fruit of God's work. So that He takes up Abraham in Mesopotamia before He changed his name, as if he were morally dignified. And, He says, Your name has been 'high father'. Now it is to be Abraham -- 'father of a multitude'; because I am Almighty. "Walk before me, and be thou perfect". Not simply like Enoch, but walking before God. Enoch and Noah walked with God. He is the first one that walked before God. God sees all that happens in walking before Him. That is where the seed comes in; no other than Isaac. It is a holy seed. "In Isaac shall thy seed be called".

Ques. Will you distinguish between Matthew's presentation and Luke's, where he goes back to Adam?

J.T. It is all under the care of heaven. Outwardly, you might say, it might easily have been destroyed. But it cannot be destroyed. "The power of the Highest shall overshadow thee", Luke 1:35. God is there to look after everything. He who made the heavens and the earth can look after that.

G.F. What is the difference between walking before God and with God?

J.T. Walking with God is taking up companionship with God. He is not now questioning you so much; it is your selection. That comes in in Genesis 5. Enoch made that selection when Methuselah was born. Children require that you should

make that companionship. Give up all other associations. Noah was the same. He was perfect in his generations. He walked with God. But to Abraham He says, "walk before me". He did not say that early. In Genesis 17 He says that, as if He had already proved Abraham. God says, I am the One and you are the other. God enters into a covenant with him. God's eye is on him all the time.

A.F.M. The thought of 'high father' precedes the thought of the 'father of a multitude'?

J.T. Well, I think it does. A man is not entitled to have a family on the low level. If he is a high father, he will baptise his children. He will lift them above the level of this world.

Rem. At that point is where his name is changed.

J.T. Yes.

G.F. He will command his house after him.

J.T. Quite so. That is good. The fact is that Abraham becomes a judge. In chapter 17 God comes to him and carries on a conversation with him with regard to the setting aside of the flesh. So that Jehovah went up and then came back to him in chapter 18, and there is the wonderful event of Abraham entertaining God. And then the question of judgment comes up. Is there anybody in the world that can judge? Is there anyone that can discriminate between good and evil? Abraham can. He says, You are the Judge of all the earth. God says, Abraham can judge, because he ruled his house after him. "To do righteousness and justice", Abraham is the source of that. Abraham says to God, You are the Judge of all the earth. Chapter 18 brings in that side.

Rem. If our houses are not right there is something wrong in our judgment.

J.T. Quite so. Judgment goes with the patriarchal side. He discerns between good and evil, not only for himself but for his house. I will make him My friend, God says.

E.P. Does priesthood come in in that connection? Judgment is about to be rained on Sodom, and Abraham assumes a priestly attitude.

J.T. Yes. He is really a priest there. He is interceding on the ground of righteousness. He does not want anything else. And that helps us with regard to our subject. Priests are clothed with righteousness. The first thing to see is how the Lord is on our side, taking on Abraham's seed, and so feeling with His brethren, because it is His brethren here; and He is able to sympathise in that He Himself has suffered. Having been tempted, He is able to help those that are being tempted. For it is only the two or three that He was with. It is the great principle that is being worked out. He is helping those that are tempted.

E.P. Do you get a touch of that in Paul, where he says to the Corinthians, "God ... will not suffer you to be tempted above what ye are able to bear"?

J.T. Exactly. He knew how far to go with them. He did not put any more on them in ministry than they were able to bear. Priesthood means I know what the brethren here need, and how to help them.

C.A.M. You can understand him starting with the exceeding greatness of the Person, and how amazingly great that makes the thing.

J.T. Yes. In chapter 4 we have this great priest over the house of God. He can sympathise with our infirmities, being tempted in all things in like manner, sin apart. And then in chapter 5, "Thus the Christ also has not glorified himself to be made a high priest; but he who had said to him, Thou art my Son, I have today begotten thee". Now we come to the order of it. Whilst Aaron is in mind right through, Aaron does not represent the order. It is another order of priesthood, that is, Melchisedec. "Who in the days of his flesh, having offered up both supplications and entreaties to him who was able to save him out of

death, with strong crying and tears; (and having been heard because of his piety;) though he were Son, he learned obedience from the things which he suffered; and having been perfected, became to all them that obey him, author of eternal salvation; addressed by God as high priest according to the order of Melchisedec", Hebrews 5:7 - 10. Now we are on another great platform, the platform of order and eternal salvation by one who has been perfected. That is the second time we get this word. He has taken on another kind of humanity. That is the humanity that is in the mind of God, and that is in view in salvation.

A.N.W. Is that the meaning of 'perfected'? That He is in a position never to change?

J.T. Yes.

Rem. I was thinking of the acacia wood -- does that refer to this order of humanity?

J.T. Well, acacia wood is a type of Christ carrying things. You get other woods in the temple, but the idea of wood is attached to Christ in type. He showed Moses wood. He is of another order morally, as in the flesh here. He is cast into the water there. The idea is carried through into Solomon's day, what is dignified.

C.A.M. I want to ask you about this matter of the order of Melchisedec. The order precedes the functioning of it.

J.T. It brings up a very important side of our subject. It came in in Genesis 14.

A.N.W. Actually linked with Abraham himself.

J.T. Just so. It is to bring out the superiority of Christ's priesthood over the Aaronic. It is marvellous the way the scripture is employed; just to bring out the superiority of our priest.

Ques. Is it the thought that we should start with the Melchisedec side?

J.T. I think all the service is on the Aaronic

principle. Melchisedec does not refer to the sympathetic side at all. It is to bring out the superiority of our priest. "Without father, without mother, ... abides a priest continually".

J.S. One who is not subject to death.

J.T. Personally, He is immune. He did not need parentage like Aaron. He is without father and mother.

C.A.M. In order to bring out this greatness primarily, this matter of order, the matter of need does not come in as yet.

J.T. It is a question of getting the greatness of the Person. The actual way that He teaches us is in sympathy. It is afterwards that you come into the idea. So that you do not get the Melchisedec order as early as you do the sympathetic side. You get it in chapter 4. That is like the dignified side we come back to, as we prove the sympathies of Christ.

J.S. It is a heavenly order.

J.T. That is the idea. The description is in the beginning of chapter 7, "For this Melchisedec, King of Salem, priest of the most high God, who met Abraham returning from smiting the kings, and blessed him; to whom Abraham gave also the tenth portion of all; first being interpreted King of righteousness, and then also King of Salem, which is King of peace; without father, without mother, without genealogy; having neither beginning of days nor end of life, but assimilated to the Son of God, abides a priest continually". So that it is a continual priesthood. He does not die. Not that He has not died. He has gone into heaven. It is the priestly state that Christ is in.

Rem. In chapter 5: 5 it says about Christ, "Thus the Christ also has not glorified himself to be made a high priest; but he who had said to him, Thou art my Son, I have today begotten thee". Is there glory attached to this?

J.T. Certainly; this epistle is built up on those two psalms. "This day have I begotten thee". That is what is alluded to here, to bring out the deity of Christ, and His immunity to death.

A.N.W. But why is He first saluted as Son before He is saluted as priest?

J.T. To bring out the Person. The Son is more than the priest. The Son is God. He is saluted as Son in the second Psalm. "I this day have begotten thee", in verse 7; and "in another place he says, Thou art a priest for ever after the order of Melchisedec". The sonship as taken in the Psalms is wider in its bearing. It is political as well as priestly. The Son is everything. The One who is owned as Son is the priest. He is a priest for ever. Everything attaches to Him. But it is the permanency of the priesthood. He is a priest for ever.

Ques. Why is that?

J.T. It is just the way God brings in things to help our minds. It means the permanency of the priesthood. It does not go so far as sonship. Sonship is wider.

C.A.M. Sonship underlies all the gospels.

J.T. Quite so.

F.C. Is the thought of Melchisedec inscrutable?

J.T. Yes. You may say that. "Without father, without mother". He comes on the scene abruptly and disappears abruptly. This chapter tells us all there is about him.

J.S. Is it in regard to the humanity of Christ, lest we should think He is a Man of earthly order?

J.T. Quite so.

A.N.W. The Melchisedec order comes in first. God secures what is His.

J.T. Quite so. He remained that for ever. So that when you come to chapter 7, "such a high priest became us, ..." the blessed God would bring out the greatness of the saints.

C.A.M. Yes. The first thing would tend to take us out of ourselves. The greatness of Melchisedec -- the words used -- all tend to make you feel this is something far exceeding myself. That seems to help a soul.

J.T. Yes. And the word is to deliver the people of God from man-made priesthood. Christendom is founded on this sort of thing. And Melchisedec is to get into my soul what that word means. That means that all this sacerdotal system that is around us is simply wiped out completely in my mind. Here is a priesthood that was preconceived and is to abide for ever. And it is to deliver us from sacerdotalism.

A.F.M. Is not this priesthood Aaronic priesthood? Does it not endear Christ to our hearts as priest? Do we not go on to appreciate Him as after the order of Melchisedec?

J.T. I am sure it does. So that the types in Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers and Deuteronomy deal with the Aaronic side. But the Melchisedec side is brought in first. So that we should have in our souls the greatness of our Priest. But then, let us not discard the functioning of a priest. What is said about Aaron is to be understood. The Scriptures make Aaron the basis of it. How he serves!

W.B. Do you connect sympathy with both? He came to Abraham after he returned from the battle with the kings. Was there not sympathy there, too?

J.T. Well, there would be. But the point made here is not that. Consider how great this man was. The point is how great he is. He is said to be King of Salem. It was a question of kings once. There were nine kings. But here it is the King. The real one comes and he brings in life. He met Abraham returning from smiting the kings, and blessed him. Abraham gave him the tenth portion of all. And then we are told what this name means, King of righteousness, King of Salem, and then "without father and mother, without genealogy; having neither

beginning of days nor end of life, but assimilated to the Son of God, abides a priest continually".

Ques. What does assimilated to the Son of God mean?

J.T. It is to bring in Psalm 110, what that psalm means. He is the Son. This person is assimilated to the Son of God. The Son of God is a wider thought.

This personage represents it in one sense. He is a great personage, and he delivers our souls from the whole sacerdotal system. Abraham the great patriarch was less than this great man. Melchisedec was great. Abraham paid him tithes. The priestly tribe paid tithes to this great man. It is for the Jewish mind.

C.A.M. He was greater than Abraham, and it is shown in the fact that Abraham gave him tithes.

E.P. Do you think this idea of the priesthood enters into conflict in the testimony? It says in Psalm 110, "The Lord ... will smite through kings".

There is the thought of Abraham returning from the slaughter of the kings, then the establishing of the King of righteousness and peace.

J.T. Yes. The thought of smiting through the kings. You must smite the kingship. The sacerdotal system is based on kingship. The whole system has to go.

E.P. You feel how these principles work out.

Abraham came up out of the slime pits. As coming up out of those conditions, Melchisedec met him.

Melchisedec brought forth the bread and the wine.

J.T. Quite so. And another thing that comes out is the idea of persons. Abraham was fortified by Melchisedec about the idea of persons instead of property. The king of Sodom wants the persons.

Abraham and Melchisedec stood for persons. It is a question of persons. This epistle is working out the greatness of persons. The people are so great; they need a great high priest like this.

E.P. In these difficulties we come to value the souls, not the things.

J.T. Just so.

A.Pf. "Neither beginning of days nor end of life". Would that make it an eternal priesthood?

J.T. That is right. Here the testimony is that men die. But this man lives for ever; so that it is an abiding priesthood.

Rem. The word in chapter 7: 16 is, "who has been constituted not according to law of fleshly commandment, but according to power of indissoluble life".

J.T. Quite so. That is the way God works the truth into our souls. It is Christ as risen from among the dead in the power of life.

Rem. We are quick to lay hold of being sanctified.

Do you not think we are slow to take in the glory of this One?

J.T. Time has nothing to do with it. It is superior to it. It is above all power of corruption.

-.McC. Would you say a little about our attitude toward time and our attitude in the eternal state?

J.T. I do not say that it would be altogether out of sight, but sonship is the thought. Priesthood comes in between because of conditions. The point is, "Let my son go, that he may serve me". The last book of the Old Testament brings it out. "They shall be unto me a peculiar treasure, saith Jehovah ... and I will spare them", Malachi 3:17.

C.A.M. It ought to help everybody in connection with deliverance from religious system -- what God thinks about the persons.

J.T. Yes. This chapter stresses it particularly.

"Such a high priest became us". That is to bring out the greatness of the saints. They need such a Man as this. You might say He needs us, but we need Him, to elevate our souls as to our greatness in the mind of God. "Holy, harmless, undefiled,

separated from sinners, and become higher than the heavens".

Rem. Say something about that thought "higher than the heavens".

J.T. Well, it is a remarkable word. The heavens are for height, we are told. They represent that thought. The earth is for depth. The Lord went down to the depths. We are to measure the height, depth, breadth, and length -- it is the four dimensions. We get it in Ephesians. But here you have what goes beyond the heavens. The heavens are for height. For the creature, heaven would be the acme of height.

J.S. In Ephesians He ascended far above all heavens.

R.W.S. "Separated from sinners". What does that mean?

J.T. That means what He was in a moral sense down here, that is apart from sin. He passes to higher than the heavens.

R.W.S. I thought of Luke's presentation of Him, and then this verse, and wondered how it worked.

J.T. Well, it is morally -- the tabernacle is a type of Christ in the wilderness, the means of excluding evil.

C.A.M. It is remarkable -- the expression "higher than the heavens". The One who was in that uncreated sphere came into a measurement condition. Had He not come down, nothing would ever have gone up. It seems to magnify all this theme of measurement.

J.T. Quite so. How He measured everything! Now He is in His own creation in a moral way. He is infinitely apart from sinners. Every person He came in contact with -- what came out! How He judged So that the whole thing is weighed and measured according to God. It is to bring out His Person. Separated from sinners is what He is down here. As a Man He had to do with sinners. But there was infinite distance between Him and sinners. Still He

eats with them. "This man receiveth sinners, and eateth with them". That was true, but He was infinitely apart from them as sinners. He came to seek and save them. "Higher than the heavens" is an allusion to His personal greatness.

J.S. "That he might fill all things" in Ephesians.

J.T. Yes. He "set himself down". It is His own action. So that our souls may be filled with the greatness of this Person.

Rem. In entering the untreated sphere, does He enter that as Man?

J.T. I think so.

Rem. Do you think that in Luke 7 the idea of measurement comes in there? "Her sins, which are many" -- He has them all measured.

J.T. Quite so. You get the idea of measurement right through. Everything is weighed.

Rem. "Out of whom went seven devils".

J.T. You get it right through the gospels. We have not touched the subject at all because it is so immense. It brings us into priesthood. Peter brings us into it -- "a holy priesthood", he says, "to offer spiritual sacrifices, acceptable to God by Jesus Christ". We become part of the system. And our prayers are that we are part of the system, as already benefiting from the system. The word translated 'advocate' is used five times. It is translated 'advocate' here, and 'Comforter' in John's gospel. It is used four times in John's gospel and once here. It is touched on in chapter 14 where the Lord is going to die. He brings in this appellation of the Spirit. He says, "another Comforter", meaning that He was one down here. While He was among them, He served, now He is going away, and there was to be Another here. We are not going to lose His patronship. The Holy Spirit takes care of that. The Spirit of God is looking after matters, He maintains us here. He looks after us in a meeting like this. He puts it

all together, and makes it all profitable. He is in charge of the matter. He is alongside of us, and looks after the assembly as anyone might look after an expedition. The Holy Spirit is here looking after matters. We could not have the testimony without His patronship. But the Lord is up there. If anyone sin, we have One up there. It is the maintenance of the dispensation. The priest refers to God, but the patron is with the Father, to maintain the dispensation. Whatever happens to any one of us, the Lord looks after it altogether. Even before it happens, He knows about it.

A.N.W. Why does it come into view with regard to sin?

J.T. Well, it is because the thing is so urgent. Many are overwhelmed if anything happens, and do worse. The power of sin is terrible. Satan would make you do more. Peter denied the Lord, but he did more. He denied Him with oaths and curses. But the Lord said, before anything happened, "I have prayed for thee, that thy faith fail not".

R.W.S. What does He do with the Father?

J.T. Oh, it is a wonderful way divine Persons have of conversing with one another about matters. The Lord spoke to the Father here. Has it ever occurred to you that They converse about you?

R.W.S. No. That never occurred to me.

J.T. Well, They do. The Lord speaks to the Father here about the saints. They occupy the whole prayer in John 17. "The men which thou gavest me out of the world". About that young man that sinned. What is to be done about this? The Lord can always point to Himself. The One who is there on our behalf is the provision for our sins. He says to God, 'You know what I have done'. That is the moral right He has. He can tell God about that.

A.N.W. And in that regard He is the righteous.

J.T. Quite so. God is bound to respect that. The

Lord has finished the work of redemption for the whole world.

-.McC. What you said regarding Peter -- while he was cursing you would say, 'I do not see any faith in such blasphemy'. But there was faith.

J.T. It is the best illustration I know about advocacy. The Lord says, "Satan hath desired to have you, that he may sift you as wheat". Satan despised them, and to the universe they were nothing at all. But "I have prayed for thee". And when the time came the cock crew.

-McC. The "you" is plural.

J.T. Yes. But the "thee" is singular. And the Lord says, "I have prayed for thee". The cock crew and He looked at Peter. And Peter wept bitterly.

A.F.M. You have put a new thought on the sifting of Satan. I always thought the wheat was valuable.

J.T. What Satan thought was that there was nothing there. I do not think that Satan had in his mind there should be any wheat at all.

Ques. Was the look a priestly look?

J.T. I suppose advocacy was part of the priesthood. The prayer preceded and now He looked. It shows the kind of thing advocacy is. He does not say anything, He looked.

C.A.M. Yes. I can see the urgency in taking care of the thing. If nothing is done, the next thing will be worse. This matter of Satan is a very interesting thing.

J.T. The book of Job is the opening up of all this. The sons of God were together and Satan would ridicule the thing. 'They are not any different. You let me at them'.

C.A.M. The whole situation was changed. So that the Advocate above in addition to the Holy Spirit here below seems to be necessary to the extent that Satan is still there.

J.T. He is the accuser of the brethren yet. It brings out the wonderful economy that there is. An Advocate up there, and one down here; John brings out four times over that there is an Advocate.

A.F.M. So that there is no reason, if we are overwhelmed, to remain overwhelmed.

J.T. If Peter had been left alone, he may have murdered somebody.

C.A.M. He would have to be put out of fellowship.

J.T. Quite so.

Rem. We need the priest with the discerning eye.

J.T. Vigilance is another thing. The idea of vigilance attaches to Christ.

A.N.W. I was thinking of the evidence of faith seen in that Peter caught the Lord's look.

J.T. Quite so. A child, if he has done something wrong, does not like to meet your eye. But Peter did not evade that.

J.S. Was it as a merciful High Priest He appears to Simon?

J.T. That is to bring out the character of the dispensation. That is what they were saying at Jerusalem. "The Lord is indeed risen, and has appeared to Simon", that great sinner.

Ques. Is that the time He appeared to Simon in John 21?

J.T. John 21 is later. The apostle Paul gives the order. He appeared to Cephas, then to the twelve, and after that was seen of above five hundred brethren at once. The saints seemed to know the meaning of that. He is a great sinner, but the Lord is the Advocate. He appeared to that man.

Rem. He went out from the presence of the Lord weeping. That would be some evidence of faith?

J.T. Well, the work of recovery had begun.

Rem. The leprosy is all out.

J.T. Yes. It took a long time.

C.A.M. It is interesting that Peter seems to be representative in that way.

J.T. Yes.

J.S. In Luke 24 the appearing to Simon is the subject of the conversation.

J.T. It is really the gospel; the appearing to Simon and the breaking of bread. "He was made known to them in the breaking of bread".

R.W.S. I wanted to ask, could I exhaust His advocacy by sinning again and again? It says, "if any man sin", not 'when a man sin'.

J.T. "If any man sin" -- but John says before that that I am not giving you any licence to sin in what I am going to say. "My children, these things I write to you in order that ye may not sin; and if any one sin, we have a patron with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous; and he is the propitiation for our sins; but not for ours alone, but also for the whole world", 1 John 2:1, 2. You talk about advocacy, and a person might take licence. Well, you might be lost anyway. John says, 'My children, I am writing now to you things that are needful, but it is that you should not sin'. There is no licence at all.

-.McC. Should I "continue in sin that grace may abound?"

J.T. Quite so. It is a terrible thing to say that.

If I continue in sin, what does that prove? If a man is filthy, let him be filthy still.

C.A.M. That seems to take the thing outside of the range of the present.

J.T. Yes. John says,"There is a sin unto death". Now, he says, I do not say that you should pray for that. We have to understand that.

C.A.M. I can see that there is something outside of the dispensation.

J.T. Yes. We have to be discerning about the government of God.

Ques. Why did the Lord speak as He did to

Pilate, "he that delivered me unto thee hath the greater sin"?

J.T. Well, it shows that there is perfect fairness. Satan will get the worst; then the beast, and the false prophet. God is perfectly fair. They will not all share the same judgment.

J.S. So that the beast and the false prophet are cast alive into the lake of fire.

J.T. All these things are to be observed. "Shall not the Judge of all the earth do right?" "He that delivered me unto thee hath the greater sin". He was not exonerating Pilate.

Rem. And so He gave Lot an opportunity for all his children. As Judge of all the earth, He exposed their position there.

J.T. Abraham was thinking of Lot all the time.

He did not have anything but a righteous person in mind, ten righteous persons.

C.A.M. He was judging all the earth. The Lord showed Pilate that He was, too. Pilate thought he was judging, but the truth was the Lord was judging Pilate.

J.T. The whole scene comes under judgment at the cross. And the remarkable thing there is that three persons come up from the enemy's camp and justify Jesus: the thief, Pilate's wife, and the centurion.

CHRIST IN US

John 14:20; John 1:35, 36; John 4:28, 29; John 6:66 - 69; John 9:35 - 38; John 12:3

My subject, dear brethren, is Christ in us. These verses treat of this subject, John presenting it more fully and more varied perhaps than any other. One of the lines of thought pervading John's ministry is fixity, having the end in mind, at least the Spirit having the end in mind, when there would be a great up-turning, thrones shaking and falling and ancient institutions rocked to pieces, a turning of the world upside down. This great ministry had in mind fixity for the Lord's people. Those who believe are to be like mount Zion, are to be like the earth, in that sense which God has founded for ever. And so the Lord in this verse in chapter 14 speaks about a day, "that day". It alludes to the day of the Spirit, for fixity in the sense in which I am speaking of it is not simply by faith but requires the Spirit. The Lord had this in mind in introducing this great subject of the Comforter. He proceeds in the passage to speak of certain results of His presence. The world did not know Him, did not see Him, but the disciples should see Him and they knew Him, He dwelt with them and should be in them. The Lord therefore, dear brethren, marks off the saints, in the thought of the disciples, sharply from the world, for the world did not see and could not know what the disciples saw and knew. We are marked off sharply from the world in the Lord's mind. The apostle tells us that the Lord has in mind in discipline that we should not be associated or identified with the world even publicly in the judgment of God, for "On this account many among you are weak and infirm, and a good many are fallen

asleep". How many of the Corinthian saints would be the subject of concern! Look around on the sick ones and those that had fallen asleep. Think of them, the word being that they should not be judged with the world. The Lord is concerned that no governmental action of God should be forced to identify His people with the world. Sometimes in His service here He had to speak to His disciples and the multitude as if there was no difference, "O unbelieving generation!" (Mark 9:19), as if He included them all, and the disciples were just occupied with defending themselves against others and the poor boy afflicted by demons was unhelped. So the Lord marks us off here sharply, as I said, and "In that day ye shall know that I am in my Father, and ye in me, and I in you", John 14:20. The Lord is anticipating the day in which this fixity should be known to us, to the saints. It is to be taken abstractly in the verse read because the Lord does not say, In that day ye shall know that I shall be in my Father; no, it is the present. It is a fixture, as any fixture is in the creation, in the mind of God. There are great fixed principles in the creation, without them the creation could not subsist, and this verse, as I understand it, is in the Lord's mind, such a thing as that. The day was coming when the saints should know it, not by investigation, but the presence of the Spirit and the accompaniments of that presence should bring out this great fact that there is a great spiritual fixity that no earthquakes or storms or upheavals can touch. And the mention of it, dear brethren, is to the end that we should come into it. I mean by knowledge. I proceed now to show the varieties in which the idea is seen in John; how Christ is in believers, the variety of features in which He is in believers.

I take up John the baptist first as he is one of the ideals of the Spirit in this gospel. Let no one think that the end of the dispensation may not develop

features of the work of God as great as at the beginning. John belonged to the previous dispensation and there was no one born of woman greater than he. The Lord says, There is no one greater than John the baptist, and yet He says one of the least in the kingdom is greater than he, that is, he does not come up to the level of our dispensation. "From the days of John the baptist", the Lord says, "until now, the kingdom of the heavens is taken by violence", Matthew 11:12. It could stand it. No institution can stand violence more and maintain itself, but it is not violence in an adverse sense but in a friendly appreciative sense,"the violent seize on it". John the baptist set out that thought of energetic condition amongst the people of God. Lethargy is abhorrent to John. He is a man of doing, he is a man of action, a man that will make the most of what is available to him. He appropriated Christ as far as he could. This evangelist leaves him saying, "He must increase, but I must decrease. He who comes from above is above all. He who has his origin in the earth is of the earth, and speaks as of the earth", John 3:30, 31. Christ came from heaven, John accepts his earthly setting but he himself knowing of the heavenly. The Spirit of God shows how he laid hold of it, how he valued that, the heavenly Man, and rejoiced to hear the voice of the Bridegroom; his joy was fulfilled, he was not complaining. The evangelist John does not mention any of John the baptist's weaknesses. He omits telling us that he sent a message to Jesus questioning whether He was the Christ. He leaves him saying that his joy is fulfilled. Would that that should be taken on by every christian! for christianity is not to promote a joyless people. Let me assure you that christianity is intended to promote joy. Paul says, "Rejoice in the Lord always: again I will say, Rejoice", Philippians 4:4. John the baptist laid hold of that thought.

I want to show the feature in which Christ appears in him at the outset. Much, of course, is said about him and by him in the chapter that I cannot touch upon. The point I wish to bring forward as foundational in the structure I would seek to build up in this address is that Christ was in John sacrificially. He calls Him the Lamb of God as he sees Him. Earlier he said He is "preferred before me, for he was before me", John 1:15. He said also he was not worthy to stoop down and to unlatch His shoe. But when he sees Him coming to him he says, "Behold the Lamb of God". It is a question of movement. The sacrificial thought is conveyed in movement. When Adam gave names to the creatures you may be sure the sacrificial idea would be there. Noah was to know the clean from the unclean creatures. Doubtless their names would carry down something to him as to this and there can be no doubt that the lamb carried with it a sacrificial thought, "the Lamb of God". Adam could not connect any creatures specifically as above others with God, but now we have the "Lamb of God". John is able to designate Him as he sees Him coming to him and so it is that every believer foundationally has some conception of Christ coming to him. It may be we have not thought of this. When he saw Him coming to him he said, "Behold the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world". It was the movement undoubtedly. What is said of John is to bring out his qualities.

How alert he was in all his sensibilities! So when he saw Him coming to him he says, "Behold the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world". What a thought! That is to say, Christ was in him in that way. How essential that would be, for what was John's ministry, what was the ministry of any save in the light of this great transaction, the taking away of the sin of the world -- not putting it down by military power yet, but taking it away. It is in the

character of the Lamb, taking away the sin of the world. That, dear brethren, is the first thought, and then as he stands, for I believe the standing in verse 35, of this great servant signifies that a Greater had come in to take on the service of God. So that it is now a question of standing and letting a Greater take on the service. This is the thought, it is practical. If a greater appears in one's vision the spirit of John would lead you to give way to him not to rival him. It is a question of God's ordering and He knows better than we. He selects his men, but Jesus stands out pre-eminently, John says, "preferred before me". That is a question of God's mind. If one is preferred before me it is for me to take a second place. John the evangelist was always ready to do that, too, always 'Peter and John'. I believe he learnt it from this great idea of John the baptist. "First, Simon, who was called Peter". John recognised that, so he is standing now and admiringly looking at Jesus as He walked, not now coming to him but walking, for it is sacrificial dignity in the walk. As in the book of Proverbs gaits of creatures like the lion and the horse and so on, indicative of God's intent in each one -- Adam, no doubt, saw that and named them accordingly. God never altered a name given by Adam. God would be delighted in the instinct and intelligence in Adam, as head. He named the creatures according to what they were in the mind of God. You can see them coming to Noah and how Noah would value them. They came two by two into the ark. What intelligence was manifest! What a sight for heaven! As they come two by two, with perfect understanding, as you might say, of the need of propagation in the new world, as it were, "male and female", it says. The new world is to be replete with life all according to the original thought of God, nothing by accident. So this walk of the Lamb is very beautiful for it calls for the exclamatory

word here, "Behold the Lamb of God!" by one in whom Christ is in this sense. He is there in a fixed way in John and John calls attention to Him. We have often noticed the astronomical characteristics in John and this is one of them. A great planet may call attention to something greater, it denotes the position of something else. So it is that John denotes something else from himself. He is not shining in his own glory but for the glory of Another. Well, that is the first great thought a foundational one, and if we are to come into this great matter of Christ in us it is to see that He is to be apprehended sacrificially.

In the case of this woman of Samaria my thought is that He is in her prophetically. If He is in me sacrificially, if I apprehend Him in that light and cherish the thought and would not give up for worlds that thought of His being in me, I owe all to Him on that ground -- sacrificial ground; then the next thing is that I must be searched as to whether there is anything incompatible in me. For if He is to be in me sacrificially surely it is due to Him that there should be no rival thing in me, nothing in me to dispute His place there. And so the woman in the course of the conversation which we have sought to dwell upon profitably, she says to Him, "I see that thou art a prophet", John 4:19. It is a question of perception now and surely all the power of perception that we have is called into action if Christ be in us. Paul says, "if Christ be in you, the body is dead on account of sin" -- all that is negative, "but the Spirit life on account of righteousness", Romans 8:10. That comes out in John 4, a question of the Spirit and of a believer in Christ discerning, perceiving that Jesus in serving her is a prophet. If He has to deal with the sin of the world, all the magnitude of the thing, He is certainly going to deal with it in me and will not tolerate it in me. "If Christ be in you, the body is dead on account of sin", that is to say, it is the

sequential thing, it is incompatible that it should be otherwise. "The body is dead", meaning it has ceased to respond to the natural desires of the flesh. And the Spirit is life, a positive thing in view of righteousness, now there is to be movement. It indeed implies that I am in the body but I do not go into that side. This woman in John 4 is the best example you can get of Christ in the believer; the body is dead. She is searched through and through and she has not a word to say in justification of her whole course, it is exposed to her and she abominates it. "Come, see a man who told me all things I had ever done: is not he the Christ?" Christ is in her. Her body is dead, she left her waterpot, but took the waterpot on herself, went back herself full. The Spirit is life in view of righteousness. If there was never a righteous act in her history there is now going to be. The Spirit is life and if Christ be in us, dear brethren, there will be righteousness. It is the order of God and if Christ be in us the body is dead, it has ceased to respond to the desires of the flesh. The body is dead. And "they that are of the Christ have crucified the flesh with the passions and the lusts", Galatians 5:24. She goes back into the city, the men have no influence over her any more, she has power over them for good. She left her waterpot, as much as to say it is not an external thing after all, but she herself is a vessel for the Spirit of God. A mighty triumph, now, Christ in her. She is full of Christ. As she went back into the city I believe her face would be aglow because she had met One who could meet all her soul's difficulties, her whole history was told and she is now a vessel because He is in her. Instead of other men (she had had five husbands), one Man now, "that ye should be married to another, even to him who is raised from the dead, that we should bring forth fruit unto God", Romans 7:3. Christ is in her and she makes it known so powerfully that the men are moved and obey, they immediately

go to Christ. "Is not he the Christ?" she says. Now I go to Peter and the third phase is that Christ is in Peter here as the Holy One of God, an allusion, I believe, to Aaron who is called of old the "saint of Jehovah", Psalm 106:16. It is now time surely to think of serving God. The matter has been touched in the conversation between the Lord and the woman of Samaria so that the instruction is accumulative. Now it is in Peter's mind but first he says, "thou hast words of life eternal". Christ is in him in that light, that He has "words of life eternal". All must come to futility apart from the great abiding thought and blessing of eternal life. There is nobody else to go to. If I follow a leader, even like Methuselah, he would die. The man would come under death. There must be the great matter of eternal life. It would have finality and permanency in view, and then he said moreover "we" meaning himself and the others -- for the Lord addresses the twelve, a great administrative number -- and Peter answers saying, "we have believed and known that thou art the holy one of God", as you might say the true Aaron of God. What service we are going to have with such an Aaron as that One who has the words of eternal life! He does not terminate by reason of death. No, our Priest lives in the power of indissoluble life. "Such a high priest became us, holy, harmless, undefiled, separated from sinners, and become higher than the heavens"; and the writer to the Hebrews says, "We have such a one high priest who has sat down on the right hand of the throne of the greatness in the heavens; minister of the holy places and of the true tabernacle, which the Lord has pitched, and not man", Hebrews 8:1, 2. What services we shall have! The Lord is helping as to that, too, in the most encouraging way, as one has opportunity of seeing it, as the Lord is helping us as to the service of God and if we are to understand it and take part in it we must understand

this feature of Christ in us as the Holy One of God. It is a fixed matter that the service of God proceeds in those who serve Him in spirit and truth, those who boast in Christ Jesus and have no confidence in the flesh and worship by the Spirit.

The next is chapter 9. What is to be observed is Christ is in this man, who had once been blind, as the Son of God. The context shows that the Lord had in mind that He should be in this man in this character. A point comes in our histories when the Lord says, 'I have come into your matters definitely and I want you to understand that I am to be in you in a certain relation. It is essential that it should be so'. He came into this man's circumstances at a given point. He did not come in before. He opened his eyes by a certain process, but we hear no more of Jesus speaking to him until he is cast out by the religious men of the world. Then He says, as it were, 'I will come in now to your circumstances'. When He heard that they had cast him out He finds him. I want the brethren to think of this and see if it does not fit in with your experience. The Lord says constantly, "am I now come". In Joshua it was at a given point at Jericho where it was needed. Much had preceded the incident and much had preceded this incident, too, in the man's history. So it is much precedes in each of our histories, when the Lord comes in in this specific way and says, 'I want now to be in you in a certain relation. It is essential to your present welfare; it is to your blessing and essential to My testimony that I am to be in you as the Son of God'. What a thought that is! He says to him after finding him, "dost thou believe on the Son of God?" That is the question asked by the Lord. I do not think there is one in this room that the Lord would not ask that question did He have the opportunity. The man is an outcast religiously; the Lord is honouring the fact. He honours every little bit of

suffering for Him, but when one is formally excommunicated because he is faithful to Christ, that is a great matter to Him. The Lord says, 'I want to consolidate that'. This man would never seek to get back into the associations out of which he had been cast. He says, 'I will hold him where he is', as Aaron's speaking held the children of Israel in the wilderness. The Lord would help you in the outcast's place. He will support and fortify you in it, consolidate you in that position. That is the point here. He is to be in this man as the Son of God and that makes the man for ever a fixture. "Who is he that overcometh the world, but he that believeth that Jesus is the Son of God?" 1 John 5:5. He is to be in this man as the Son of God and that makes this man a victor to be qualified against all attacks. After excommunication they think that they have lost something and they may hold out a bait to get him back but the Lord says, 'I will hold this man'. I will consolidate this victory; He says, 'I want to be in you as the Son of God'. The man says, "who is he, Lord, that I might believe on him?" I am ready for that. Thank God He is helping greatly on this point. It is because I believe some are ready for it. This man is ready for Him. The Lord loves when we are ready for a great feature of the truth which He would bring to us. The Lord says, "Thou hast both seen him, and it is he that talketh with thee", thus crediting him with soul history. There is much earlier in the chapter more than we can name ourselves. You take the men of faith in Hebrews 11, there is not one perhaps in that whole list who would have said in his days that he was a man of faith. It takes years to bring it out, so here the Lord says, "Thou hast both seen him, and it is he that talketh with thee. And he said, Lord, I believe". John's way is to make real believers ready for every feature of the truth. I do not believe this man would have ever made any headway had he

not accepted this new great feature of the truth -- the sonship of Christ. He believed and not only that but he worshipped Him. The Son of God is God. He is an Object of worship and faith discerns it, the man worshipped Him. Now you can see, dear brethren, how all this is constructive and it is intended to make real christians, real believers and real worshippers too. For now we have the subject of worship in chapter 4, minister of the sanctuary in chapter 6, and a worshipper of the Son of God in chapter 9, the Son of God in a man and he is a worshipper.

I come now to the last phase, that is Mary of Bethany. Christ is in her as you can understand in all the features of which I have been speaking and she adds the thought of affection; that is, she is the great lover of Jesus and what can all these features be, dear brethren, aside from this -- from a real genuine admiration of Jesus, the supreme Object of our hearts? Mary's history shows that as regards her it was Christ and Christ only, so that as the facts are stated here we have the sequential adverb repeated. "Then took Mary a pound of ointment of spikenard, very costly, and anointed the feet of Jesus, and wiped his feet with her hair: and the house was filled with the odour of the ointment". She took it. Martha was serving, Christ was in her, too, but not in this way. She had a different, a shallower apprehension of Christ than Mary, although the Lord greatly honoured Martha when He came to Bethany on a previous occasion. Martha met Him outside and He did not go further; He stayed there until Mary came there, showing that He valued Martha and would not allow any preferential thought in regard of the saints. For He loved Martha and Mary and Lazarus, they were all lovable, but then Mary was more lovable and that is what we might do well to think of. There is, dear brethren, such a thing as lovability for the divine eye, the increase of the traits of Jesus under the eye of

God. I become more and more lovable and I think that Mary became more and more lovable. She never was more lovely, I venture to say, than she was at this moment.

Now you see the movements; she took the pound of ointment of spikenard, very costly, "and wiped his feet with her hair: and the house was filled with the odour of the ointment". You can see how this exceeds all that we have had, for the fact of Christ being in her leads to the filling of the house with odour. What a contributor she is to the service of the house of God! For that is the thing being led up to in John. We have the subject of worship in chapter 4, minister of the sanctuary in chapter 6, and the worshipper of the Son of God in chapter 9 and we have the house filled by this worshipper, filled with precious odour. The Spirit of God dwells on this in these verses. I believe, as I said, that Mary was never more lovely in the eyes of Jesus. The Song of Songs helps us as to these mutual love matters, how lovableness is seen both in the male and female speakers. The female speaker describes the object of her affections. She is not afraid or ashamed. She does it beautifully, finally she says He is altogether lovely, supremely so. You cannot add to it. But then he says wonderful things about her, about the prince's daughter. So again in Psalm 45 one of the great Maschil psalms -- a teaching psalm -- the word is, "So shall the king greatly desire thy beauty", that good thing, then you are more lovely as you leave your family relations, forsake your father's house and your own people. So long as you fail to be weaned away from the natural there are blemishes, you are not quite so lovely as you might be unless you have done this. As you abandon all these you are more lovely, "So shall the king greatly desire thy beauty". Is it not attractive, dear brethren, to abandon all that causes blemishes? We know how much is expended

today on beautification of people's persons, removing natural blemishes, but why take on blemishes? The Lord shows how to remove them. He delineates the kind of beauty that He loves. I think Mary represents all that. She is beautiful in the eyes of Christ and He defends her. We have spoken today of the cloud by day and the fire by night; it is a matter of protection. What is so valuable as the tabernacle, as His saints are under God's eye? What is so valuable must be protected by the cloud and the protection enables God to have a residence there. The cloud is on the tent in the first reference and then the glory filled the tabernacle, that is the divine residence. What is inside involves all the beautiful texture of the fabrics and the gold and the beautiful embroidery -- all that is within. The glory filled all that. "The king's daughter is all glorious within". I believe Mary of Bethany is fit for the finest palace of the King and she is so valued in the King's eyes that He protects her. One begins to criticise her, she knew something about that. Her sister had criticised her before. Alas! for the bitter criticisms current amongst us. But now there is the criticism of Judas, and the Lord graciously extends the wing of His protection over one so valuable. He says, She has kept this until the day of my burial. She must not be interfered with. I believe there is no danger on these lines. We shall be divinely protected by God against the attacks of the enemy and then we shall be thus secured for God that Christ may be in us in all these features, and so fixity is understood and it goes on into eternity where the glory is to be "in the assembly in Christ Jesus unto all generations of the age of ages".

HOUSEHOLDS IN THE NEW TESTAMENT (1)

Genesis 18:1 - 11; Genesis 19:14; Genesis 7:7; 1 Samuel 1:20; 1 Samuel 3:11 - 13

J.T. I was thinking as our brother was reading the scripture as to how the scriptures approach the subject of households in the New Testament. Paul seems to be the vessel through whom the subject is introduced properly, and how it arose from his being invited into a house. If one lived in Abraham's time, and were invited into his house, one would find order there. But Ishmael was there. There is a slight discrepancy there -- I mean to say, Ishmael was there, and when Isaac was born he was mocking. In the New Testament the apostle is invited into a house and no one on earth could be a better judge of a household at that time than he. The householder says, "If ye have judged me to be faithful to the Lord, come into my house, and abide there", Acts 16:15. Now that seems to be the start of the thought in the New Testament from the standpoint of apostolic ministry. The apostle is one capable of judging a house. He is invited in on the ground of the householder being judged by him to be faithful.

A.R. Do you mean faithful in the measure in which she has taken in Paul's ministry?

J.T. The householder's heart was opened by the Lord. The Lord opened her heart to listen to the things spoken by Paul. And she was baptised, and then she says, "If ye have judged me to be faithful to the Lord, come into my house". Now, that seems to be an excellent start for the thought. The householder has had her heart opened by the Lord to attend to the things spoken by Paul and she accepts the divine requirement. Now we have in that chapter, Acts 16, the subject remarkably opened up; as if the apostle had such congenial circumstances in Lydia's house that

all believers' houses must be secured. The next one that comes up is the jailor. Paul talked about his house, as if the thought arose from what he had found in Lydia's house. He carried it in his mind. How the Lord met with it in His service here! He met with the assembly in principle. He found the jailor and that set things moving. So that the thought would be to get a concrete example of a household.

A.F.M. Do you think a little stress might be laid on the word 'when'? "When she had been baptised".

J.T. Paul is the one the Lord used to open it up. See if Abraham's house came up to Lydia's. There does not seem to be any Ishmael here. I am stressing Lydia because she is the first household mentioned to be baptised. The man most qualified to judge is Paul, and the next opportunity he has of helping a soul, he says, "thy house".

Rem. We feel the need of being helped on the matter.

J.T. Well, if I come here to Chatham, the subject is good, the next thing is the house. What house am I to go into here, to start this matter? Come into my house, that is the next thing. If I get good entertainment there, the next place I go to, I want to get the believer's house.

Rem. It is remarkable how the verse is quoted in christendom: "Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved". The better translation is, "thou and thy house".

J.T. There are two "thous". "Believe on the Lord Jesus and thou shalt be saved, thou and thy house" (verse 31). The first "thou" is as a saved person. That is, my own personal salvation must be settled first. The second "thou" links me with my house. It is not one stroke. I am saved first, and as a saved person my house will be brought in.

A.N.W. That is emphasised with Lydia, because she was the one that attended to the word. But in baptism she carries the household with her.

J.T. Quite so. You will follow what was pointed out, that there are two "thous" there. The first "thou" is my own matter, my own salvation.

A.Pf. "And when she had been baptised and her house".

J.T. Quite. The head is distinctly separate. They said to the jailor, "Believe on the Lord Jesus and thou shalt be saved". That is one thing, the next thing is, "thou, and thy house". Salvation for yourself first. It is as a saved man his house is saved. They are not saved together. The man is saved first, and then you can count on God coming in.

Rem. So Abraham has a wonderful transaction with God prior to chapter 18. It is remarkable what is going on in his own soul.

J.T. Quite so. He had an Ishmael there. You must not forget that. It is a terrible element in the house. The truth is that Abraham was not saved in the full sense of the word or he would have had an exercise about it.

A.P.T. Is there any adjustment needed in Zacchaeus? You recall the scripture in Luke where there was some difference in the Lord's mind, in Zacchaeus wanting to see Him and the Lord coming into his house.

J.T. The Lord did not seem to have any hesitation about going into his house. He, rather, presents it to Zacchaeus as a premium. "Make haste and come down, for today I must remain in thy house". It is a premium. I do not think the Lord had any hesitancy about it. As soon as the Lord is in the house He says, "salvation is come to this house". The man is saved. The Lord was there and salvation had come to the house. The second "thou" in the jailor's

case implies that his own matter is taken up first. It is the believer's house that is saved.

N.W. What does it mean for the man to be saved first?

J.T. It means his salvation. "Thou and thy house".

N.W. But you have more in your mind than merely saved in the ordinary sense of the word.

J.T. It is always an open matter. It is applied as already effective. "To us that are saved" (1 Corinthians 1:18); it is a progressive thing.

A.R. Whereas in Abraham's house, he had Sarah and Hagar, and when the boy was weaned Ishmael mocked. He was interfering with Paul's ministry and had to be cast out.

J.T. Quite so. There were two elements there. They were interfering with the state of the house.

Rem. Does that fit in with Acts 16? The first "thou" was there. It only enhances what you say about the "thou and thy house". Ishmael was there because of Abraham's failure. Is not your thought the moral adjustment of the head first?

J.T. That is right. And Abraham had come to the idea of salvation in chapter 18, but still Hagar and Ishmael were there. So that there is a serious discrepancy and it only enhances what we are saying Get the head right first.

Ques. Are the moral qualities seen in that Lydia attended to the things spoken by Paul? Does that lay the basis for it?

J.T. That is the beginning. "And a certain woman, by name Lydia, a seller of purple, of the city of Thyatira, who worshipped God, heard; whose heart the Lord opened to attend to the things spoken by Paul. And when she had been baptised and her house". The thought is left with her first. When she had been baptised, not when she and her house had been baptised. The thought of the head is there. As

you say, the head must be right. When the apostle has to say to the next person that needs salvation, it seems to me he carries the thought with him of what he enjoyed in the house of Lydia. "Having gone out of the prison, they came to Lydia" (verse 40).

Rem. On her side she constrained them. There are only two occasions where that word is used. In Luke 24 they constrained Him.

J.T. Quite so. How perfectly at home he would be there.

A.R. Is it your thought that Paul has in his mind the thought of the assembly? It is worked out in households first.

J.T. I think that is the way it stands. The fact that he brings it in, as if he would secure the house; and then it goes on to say (verse 32) that "they spoke to him the word of the Lord, with all that were in his house. And he took them the same hour of the night and washed them from their stripes; and was baptised, he and all his straightway. And having brought them into his house he laid the table for them, and rejoiced with all his house, having believed in God". It seems to me that the apostle would say this is a complete victory, following up what we enjoyed in Lydia's house. This is a complete victory.

We have this man's house. "Having believed in God ...". He is like Abraham. It is the full position of the believer.

T.W. Might this matter of the household work out where the husband is an unbeliever? Would the principle work out that the household might be for the Lord as in Lydia's case, if her husband were an unbeliever?

J.T. We do not know about her husband. Where the husband is an unbeliever it is extremely difficult.

T.H. In view of the apostle coming to the Corinthians, he seemed to secure entrance there by means of the households of Chloe and Stephanas; and it

seems that he had households in his mind all along in his ministry.

J.T. He is the household man. He introduces the matter, and evidently from having experienced the thing. What a great thing it is.

B.P. Is it significant that baptism has such a place?

J.T. It is. Paul says, The Lord did not send me to baptise, but to preach the gospel. "I baptised also the house of Stephanas, for the rest I know not if I have baptised any other". As if, besides baptising Crispus and Gaius, that were the one thing he would do.

C.A.M. This matter of the "thou" is a very interesting thing. When we have to do with a house -- even the Lord had to do with a house -- it seems to be an important thing as to what the head of the house is personally. We are to respect the work of God in the children.

J.T. I think there is a word in it. It seems to be the thought of God to secure the head, to have to do with him, and then his house.

W.F.K. Sarah takes the initiative in casting out Hagar and Ishmael.

J.T. That helps as to salvation being in the house.

Abraham is hardly equal to the position. He would have retained Hagar and Ishmael. He was hardly saved in that sense, although one would be slow to say much. It says, "he will command ... his household after him". Things would get right. The house would not be right till then.

A.S. Sarah would represent the subjective side. Evidently there was a work of God going on in her soul regarding Ishmael.

J.T. Quite so.

A.F.M. The word 'saved' occurs in Exodus 14. "Thus Jehovah saved Israel that day out of the hand of the Egyptians" (verse 30). They were in that

way delivered out of Egypt. Is not that the object in salvation? Referring to Hagar and Ishmael, they were of Egyptian origin. Would not salvation today be entire separation from the world?

J.T. What is Egyptian has to be cast out. The word 'cast' is to be noted. It is a strong word. There is no allowance of Egyptian principles in the house. That is what makes Abraham's house so precarious. Although he would command his house after him, there were those elements there and Sarah had to take the lead in the matter. She represents the subjective element. She represents the wife and she is a good example as to how a wife may put things right.

A.R. It does not say that anything had to be cast out of Lydia's house, or the Philippian jailor's house.

J.T. No.

R.W.S. Why is this set out in a condition other than husband and wife?

J.T. Because so many houses are like Lydia's, where the husbands are dead or the like. God takes account of it. It is a difficult matter. It made it all the greater triumph. "Whose heart the Lord opened to attend to the things spoken by Paul". That was the right way to meet that condition. It is the same sort of thing in chapter 18, and tests Paul about the people that were there. He saw what was needed to open her heart; not simply to hear the gospel, but to attend to the things Paul said.

C.A.M. I was impressed with what you were saying. It seems to be such an answer to Satan in this section. You were referring to the fact that God had something in this place. Here is a woman that was giving her ear in the right direction, even if she did not have a head, and listening to the apostle.

J.T. By listening to him she would get the mind of God. He spoke about the household, too.

B.P. The man was in his mind when he saw the

vision of the man of Macedonia standing, and saying, "Pass over into Macedonia and help us".

J.T. It seems so. It would be a great test to the apostle that the one outstanding convert was a woman. But being a woman, she becomes a head.

She attended to the things spoken by Paul. She is a householdly woman. There is nothing said about her house, or her children, but she would be capable of managing a house. Come into my house if you reckon that I am faithful. That is wonderful as to the humility of the woman.

Rem. In the beginning there was Eve, who was not, perhaps, subject to Adam in recognising the head. In the first house in christianity we get those recognising the head.

J.T. This is the one the Spirit of God takes up to record for us.

E.B. Why do you think it is that God selected a jailor?

J.T. Because his office would make him a very hard man. These cases are cited so that we might not be discouraged in hard soil. He is the last man you would think of, the way he treated the apostle Paul.

E.B. He was not being a head to his house.

A.S. This characterised the assembly in Philippi, "no assembly communicated anything to me in the way of giving and receiving save ye alone", Philippians 4:15.

J.T. They were on the giving line.

T.H. When Elisha met the widow he says, "what hast thou in the house?" 2 Kings 4:2. Would that not be most helpful?

J.T. The Old Testament helps to elucidate the New. His master had to do with a house, too. Elijah tested out the head of the house. "Make me thereof a little cake first", 1 Kings 17:13. Are you ready to make God first and yourself second? No one can be head aside from that.

B.P. Would the ultimate of that be having the assembly in your house?

J.T. Well, that is a great point. Elijah tested out the head of the house. She was a widow, taken up, you might say, like Lydia. He is sent to Zarephath and he finds her gathering sticks, preparing to eat the little she had and die. A very poor case, but how well she turns out. She entertains the prophet. In fact, the word used is 'maintains'. "I have commanded a widow woman there to maintain thee". And she does. Now with Elisha in 2 Kings 4, as he begins his ministry, there is another widow. The house is brought up again, and the next woman is the Shunammite. She has a house, and when the son dies he walks about in the house, as much as to say, 'Is there anything in the house that is the secret of this boy's death?' The Scriptures are full of it, only let us get a concrete example in christianity. The head of it invites the great servant on the ground of his own judgment of it, for after all what does God think of my house? That is the idea. I am there on God's terms.

-.McC. One is impressed with the character of Lydia's invitation. Not only to come into her house, but to abide. If I asked a brother to come into my house, I would be sure that there was nothing there that would be out of accord.

J.T. If his eye has to rest on novels, it is no honour to him at all. So that the service of God is to be in the house on divine terms.

Rem. So that we may speak a word in that house about something.

J.T. There is liberty there.

A.T. Does 1 Timothy run concurrently with this ministry? The apostle says, that if anyone aspires to exercise oversight, he must know how to conduct his own house well. If I had a radio in my house, I would not be conducting my house well.

Rem. Putting it in the attic is not casting it out.

J.T. The word 'cast' is very striking. In Exodus 15 we have Jehovah showing Moses wood, and he cast it in. That is what is due to all that is sinful. Cast it, use force.

A.R. When Paul went to the Philippian jailor's house he "spoke to him the word of the Lord, with all that were in his house". He is speaking the word of the Lord.

J.T. Quite so. It is always a question of authority when you bring the Lord in. And what comes out is that the jailor rejoiced. He is so pleased with all that came to him. He "rejoiced with all his house". They all joined in.

A.F.M. It says, "with all his house". Would they all share?

J.T.. That is the point. The word 'house' -- the whole house is in it.

Rem. With Lydia it is her intelligence first, and then her affections. She first heard and then the Lord opened her heart, as if the Lord valued her intelligence.

Ques. Does it not emphasise the love side in the jailor's household? He lays the table. It is a service of love.

J.T. The jailor is doing a woman's work. He lays the table. It is to bring out how thoroughly serviceable he was. He would do anything for these men.

B.P. Was not that commendable?

J.T. Yes.

Rem. The jailor's wife is included in the house.

J.T. If there was a wife.

Rem. I thought that she would be in the background on account of the head being saved. She would take the second place.

J.T. Quite.

Ques. Do you not think there is a lack of inviting the men of God into our houses?

J.T. The servant of God represents God.

C.A.M. I was very much impressed with that. You cannot patronise a servant of God. It is a remarkable test when a servant of God comes into the household.

A.T. That woman in Kings makes room for him. He is not an ordinary visitor. There are certain classes amongst the people of God. There are those worthy of double honour.

J.T. Quite so. You see what she says about him in 2 Kings 4:8. "And it came to pass on a day, that Elisha passed to Shunem, where was a wealthy woman; and she constrained him to eat bread. And so it was, that as oft as he passed by, he turned in thither to eat bread. And she said to her husband, Behold now, I perceive that this is a holy man of God, who passes by us continually. Let us make, I pray thee, a small upper chamber with walls, and let us set for him there a bed, and a table, and a seat, and a lampstand; and it shall be when he cometh to us, he shall turn in thither". That is the way she looked at it. He would be passing by. The Lord comes before us, His servants come before us; do we not discern them?

Rem. "She said to her husband". We do not want to do this independently.

J.T. She discerns who he was. "I perceive that this is a holy man of God".

A.R. She put the boy on the bed of the man of God. She saw that there was virtue in him.

J.T. Quite so. That brings out the servants of God are not to be patronised. Lydia is the great model for us. She appeals to the apostle, it is a question of your judgment of me, whether I am worthy.

R.W.S. He resisted. He did not say, 'I will not come'. But she had to force him to do so; as if she might never get another chance.

J.T. The Shunammite is the gainer, as was the other widow in Elijah's time. They are all gainers. Wherever the servants of God are accorded their place, we always gain.

Rem. And on the contrary the locality may suffer on account of not doing that. It is because they needed it in the place. They needed the servant there.

J.T. God knows that, too. God says to Elisha, "I have commanded a widow woman there to maintain thee".

A.Pf. The Lord invited Himself to Zacchaeus' house. Is that the contrast you find?

J.T. Just so. The Lord knew Zacchaeus would be glad. It was an honour.

T.H. He "received him with joy".

J.T. Quite so. "Today salvation is come to this house".

T.W. Would you say something about Luke 10 the son of peace in the house?

J.T. That is a good suggestion. That is a word for the servants. If they go into a house and the son of peace is there, their peace shall rest upon it. It is an important thing to have a right base. That is the idea of Lydia. That was Paul's place. He did not stay with the jailor; she is the son of peace.

J.C. There are two houses here in Philippi.

J.T. We must get concrete evidence of this in Chatham.

B.P. There were six houses in Toronto where the breaking of bread could be held.

J.T. The son of peace is a matter of importance. You come to a town to serve. It is a great matter where you are going to lodge. You do not want to be hampered. Hence the Lord says, "If there is a son of peace there, stay there".

Rem. If there is. As though there were certain moral conditions connected with it.

J.T. Lydia is the thought. Paul went back to Lydia's house. That was his base.

C.A.M. In connection with this matter of the son of peace. As you say, when a servant goes into a place, he does not want to be hampered. This matter of salutation enters into all that. One of the things that greatly restricts in connection with this matter is that in some houses salutation is not properly considered. You are hampered if the house was not godly in its salutation. If you found those there that you could not greet, you are hampered. Would you go with that?

J.T. I do, indeed.

Rem. Would that show that there are not those peaceful conditions in the house? If I am having people in my house whom I ought not to have, there is something that is wrong there.

J.T. Quite so. I think Elisha walking in the house is the point to notice. The boy died. Why has that boy died? God gave him and yet he died. Is it because the conditions in the house were not suitable to bring him up for God?

Rem. Evidently they were not right. The father sent him to the mother.

J.T. The father seemed to be powerless. Why did he not look after the boy?

A.R. He says, "my head!"

Rem. The matter of going to and fro in the house seems to come after he had begun to work on the boy.

J.T. It looks as if he were saying to himself, 'Are the household conditions right? Is there a skeleton in the cupboard?' Something that is secretly working to damage the young.

A.N.W. The Lord definitely put some young people out of the house before He raised the young girl.

J.T. Quite. They had flute-players there. That was nothing to have in the house.

A.T. He did not put Peter's wife's mother out. You were saying that he put certain ones out of the house. I was wondering if there was another way of touching it.

J.T. Quite so. It was only a malady. He cured her. She was a good case. The Lord is ready to help at any time.

Rem. In Martha's case, the Lord was finally unhampered there.

J.T. Finally. She not only criticised Mary, but the Lord Himself. She received him, but it was very chilly inside.

-.McC. If you are invited to our town, and there are several homes open to you, and they are equally desirous to have you, what would the test be?

J.T. These visits are contemplated, so that God goes before, and you find a Cornelius or a Lydia whom God is actually working in. That furnishes a base for His operations.

-.McC. And you, as the invited, would discern that?

J.T. I should.

Ques. Whom would you approach in the house where moral conditions are not right?

J.T. The head.

Rem. Help us on that. The Lord spoke to Jacob, "Arise, go up to Bethel". He commanded his household.

A.N.W. In regard to commanding his household, it says in Genesis 18:19, "For I know him that he will command his children and his household after him, and they shall keep the way of Jehovah, to do righteousness and justice, in order that Jehovah may bring upon Abraham what he hath spoken of him".

J.T. Just so. You have in your mind the difference between the children and the household. I think the household is wider. It includes all that are under the head. Children have a special place. The

household includes the servants. It would include the whole order of things under a head.

A.N.W. Everything that he has a right to control.

J.T. Quite so. Take Abraham's house. The oldest servant of his house, the one that was sent out to seek the bride for Isaac, there is the suggestion there that he belongs to the household.

A.F.M. Would you mind saying something about the service of the sons of the widow, and of the sons of the prophet, as to how they were brought in?

J.T. I think the time is up. We will follow on with that tonight.

HOUSEHOLDS IN THE NEW TESTAMENT (2)

Hebrews 11:7; 1 Samuel 1:20, 23 - 28; 2 Kings 4:1 - 7

J.T. The burden that is on the hearts of many parents, which I gather from one and another, is how young ones are to merge in the assembly. They come along in the truth and then desire not to go further. The thought is what instruction Scripture gives, where the responsibility lies when it descends particularly on children. It would seem as if Noah in this respect would fit in as a man who appeared in a crisis. The world of that day was at its worst, and judgment was in the mind of God for it. What exercises he had! He was moved with fear. That is the comment of the Spirit of God, in the New Testament, and in the end of chapter 6 and 7 of Genesis. He was moved with fear and prepared an ark for the saving of his house. His exercise was for his house. And then another thing is the number of households that are headless, in the sense of the man being head: some not in the truth, others not living; how the wife may act, and how she would be responsible so that the gain of the household should not be lost to the children, and correspondingly, that the assembly should not suffer. In the case of Hannah we have the husband living, but the exercises are all hers as regards the child and the desire then reached.

A.L. Is Noah a type of what we had in the previous reading? It says that he walked with God.

J.T. That is right. The carrying out of what we had. The need was in his house. He had come into it already.

Rem. Would you say in Hannah's house the husband's affections were divided? He had two wives.

J.T. Quite. He had a great opinion of himself, too. He said, "Am not I better to thee than ten sons?"

A.R. In reference to the first scripture that was read in Hebrews, do you think the possibilities of the household are very great? Noah judges this world in the building of the ark, but it is a generation for another world coming up.

J.T. Quite so, and if that is to be there must be a going in. The word was to him. The ark should be built and then Jehovah says to him, "But with thee will I establish my covenant; and thou shalt go into the ark, thou, and thy sons, and thy wife, and thy sons' wives with thee". That is an understanding between a head of a house and God. There is no command directed to the children. It is all to Noah, and then it says in verse 7 of the next chapter, "And Noah went in, and his sons, and his wife, and his sons' wives with him, into the ark". And then it is said in verse 13, "On the same day went Noah and Shem and Ham and Japheth, the sons of Noah, and Noah's wife, and the three wives of his sons with them, into the ark"; and then in verse 16, "and Jehovah shut him in". These verses show that there is a going in to be there. The ark may be taken to be a type of the assembly as going through, carrying the precious things of God, the persons, to establish another world. There is to be a going in each by himself, all under the command given through the head.

A.P.T. Following out the thought of going in, in verse 7; in chapter 8: 18 they go out. Is that your thought: the positive result of going in?

J.T. Well, exactly. They go in and they go out.

The going out is under the Lord's direction, too. On the renewed earth, not to seek one's pleasure but into a new world.

A.F.M. Look at that verse in John 10, "I am the

door: if any one enter in by me, he shall be saved, and shall go in and shall go out and shall find pasture" (verse 9).

J.T. The idea is there. There is the thought of going in. The point is the door. "If any one enter in by me, he shall be saved". Christ is the door. Well, that fits in with Genesis 6 and 7. Salvation depended on going in.

B.P. Would you say that Jacob as a young man learned that it was the gate of heaven?

J.T. That is good.

C.A.M. I was struck with the expression used. It was really of the nature of a crisis. Our protection in a crisis would be our going in. There is a tendency in a crisis to be occupied with all kinds of things outside; whereas, really, the only safe place is inside.

J.T. Quite so. The Lord alludes to it. In the day that Noah entered into the ark. That was an epoch. That is really a crucial matter. Young people go on to a point and then determine they will not go in. They want to retain their liberty, but the enemy only seeks to get them into bondage.

Rem. It says they go into the city in Revelation and after that it says "without are dogs". Would that correspond with what we have to deal with today? What is inside and what is outside.

J.T. "Without are dogs". "Blessed are they that wash their robes, that they may have right to the tree of life".

Rem. A person may be in the room, but you speak of being in the thing experimentally. In fellowship would be the step inside, would it?

J.T. Exactly. Paul says, what have I to do with judging those outside? It is what is inside. You get it running through Scripture, and with Noah you get the thought not only of his house. "They went to Noah into the ark". They all looked up to Noah. It is the work of God. We have to reckon on that.

You might think Noah would say, 'Well, look at these creatures. How are they going to come?' He cannot sit somewhere to catch them. Well, you must trust to God to move in them or they will not come. That is a word to the parents. It says in verse 8, "Of clean beasts, and of beasts that are not clean, and of fowl, and of everything that creeps on the ground, there came two and two unto Noah into the ark, male and female, as God had commanded Noah". How did that happen? It was God.

Rem. There was a period of seven days in verse 4. Jehovah says, "For in yet seven days I will cause it to rain on the earth ...". It was a very short time for that whole creation to get in.

J.T. Quite so.

Rem. That seven days would be a period, would it not? A period of time in which the Lord would work.

J.T. Quite so. You can count on that. Noah would know them. He did not name them. He might think, how can I expect them to come? They are not said to be wild or carnivorous, but what a test that would be to him. He says, not one of the men around will come. But the beasts and fowl and creeping things came, God saw to that.

J.S. It is a very great encouragement to faith, to see the movements of the creatures to the ark. Two by two, male and female.

J.T. Quite so. It casts you upon God. If He does not do that, you cannot expect it. There are no young people mentioned in connection with the ark. They are all mature. He could not say to Shem, 'Do this or that'. Yet Shem was amenable. He did exactly as he was told, and in regard to the cattle, they all came. Noah, you may be sure, would be very much cast on God.

J.S. He who gave them being worked in them.

J.T. Quite so.

J.T.Jr. Why do the sons of Noah come first?

J.T. They are next to him in intelligence. Their names are given. They are in separate households and yet he is head of them. But they come nearest to him in intelligence.

A.N.W. Are you implying that he had more to do with God about Shem than Shem had direct?

J.T. I should think so. We read of the God of Shem later. Doubtless, he was a godly man, but it was all put on the head. The direction was to Noah.

B.P. Noah found favour.

J.T. Quite so.

Rem. So there is fruit Godward. His sons come into view.

J.T. Quite so. In chapter 9 they are blessed, so that there is a link with God, but all issuing from Noah's personal exercise. He walked with God, and he was perfect amongst his generations.

T.H. Would you mind helping me in that he was warned oracularly?

J.T. That is a credit to him. The word 'oracular' would mean that he was a man capable of receiving it in that way; God did not have to go out of His way. Samuel did not discern God's voice at the outset, but Noah did. It is an honour.

A.P.T. Is there any thought of headship in John's gospel? In verses 38 and 39 of chapter 1 it says, "Rabbi, ... where abidest thou? He says to them, Come and see. They went therefore, and saw where he abode; .." and in chapter 4 you get the same thought with the woman. I was wondering if there was any thought in the gospel.

J.T. That is right. You get so many examples of persons in whom Christ was. If Christ is in me, He is my Head. He was in John the baptist sacrificially, and that is how he spoke of Him. He says, "Behold the Lamb of God!" And the two disciples heard him speaking, and followed Jesus, and they say to Him,

"Rabbi, ... where abidest thou?" They called Him Teacher. John called Him that. They did not call Him Lamb. They spoke rightly. They said, We need to be taught, we need more teaching. They called Him Rabbi. We are told in the scripture that that is what is meant. They needed teaching, and, of course, there is not one here who would say he did not need to be taught.

A.R. In Genesis 7 the great feature of headship is seen in Noah.

J.T. Quite so.

A.R. He is head of his wife and all the creatures are coming to Noah.

J.T. There is no suggestion of rebellion at all in the ark, nor is there a suggestion of children. When we think of the young people merging in the assembly we must not think of them as children. No one has a place in the assembly except a man. The idea must be in the man. Maybe the brethren do not think that is right. What do you say about that, Mr. W.?

A.N.W. I think that is right. They are not in view in Jordan, whereas in crossing the Red Sea Moses says, "We will go with our young and with our old".

J.T. When we come into fellowship in the book of Numbers it is from twenty years old and upward. All in fellowship are to be men.

Rem. They are supposed to be able to think for themselves and do for themselves.

J.T. So that we do not say, He is a wonderful boy. If he is in fellowship he must be a man.

J.S. Is that what in meant in John 1? "Thou shalt be called Cephas".

J.T. Quite so.

J.T.Jr. The babes were in Corinth.

J.T. Paul says, "I ... have not been able to speak to you as to spiritual, but as to ... babes in Christ".

H.A.S. What about the lambs in John 21?

J.T. John in his epistle classifies us as children, that is, when he says,"My children". It is a dignified thought. They are little ones, but not in the sense of being unable to speak for themselves. The principle is, "He is of age". Twenty is of age. He is of age spiritually. He might be only thirteen, but he may be of age.

T.H. So, in the house some of our offspring take their place with us in fellowship -- it would be quite different from those who have not taken their place.

J.T. They are brethren now, and it is to be understood that they are brethren. Samuel, in the second reference to his ministry, wore a linen ephod. That would not suit at the football game.

Rem. He would have to take it off or not go to the football game.

A.P.T. It requires great spiritual ability to sit down at the table with your wife and your daughter but at the same time they are your sisters. It requires great spiritual power to understand that.

J.T. A man does not look at his wife in the assembly as his wife, she is his sister. "Let them ask their own husbands at home", where the relationship belongs.

A.N.W. Six of the apostles were brothers, that is, three pairs of brothers.

J.T. So that spirituality was required if they were to answer to the mind of God.

A.R. You would expect young people to speak for themselves.

J.T. In New Zealand we had great difficulty because the brethren in one place were all composed of one family, and in due time the sons had to deal in discipline with their father.

C.A.M. That is a very interesting thing. It seems to involve this matter of headship, the atmosphere of a house. If the work of God in the child is not properly recognised, and you have a kind of domineering

condition there, disaster will come to that house; and it will take place just as you say. It seems as if the work of God in the child must be greatly respected.

J.T. Quite so. Genesis 6 is to show us that of every creature, two and two came into the ark. They came to Noah.

Rem. The official priesthood was breaking down in Samuel.

J.T. That is the next thing to look into; I can see in Noah's case, how God worked with him; the Lord worked with the creatures, we can reckon on that. Aside from it nothing can come about for God. In Hannah's case we have a household. The head is really not head, although he loved Hannah, which is to his credit; but then the exercise was all hers. He did not discredit it, but the exercise was all hers. And the instruction now is for sisters who have husbands who are not in fellowship; as to how they are to work the thing, and as to whether they are able to contribute to the house of God through their families.

H.A.S. That is a very important question with us in Chatham. Some of our sisters feel it very keenly that their husbands are not with them, and how can they carry on and win their children when their husbands are opposed to them?

J.T. Do you not think the instruction in Samuel helps?

H.A.S. Very much.

J.T. The official priesthood was corrupt, but in this first chapter that was not noted. Things were outwardly normal. They all went to the special meetings at Jerusalem for the sacrifices, and the sons of Eli were there. They are even called priests of Jehovah, for God is not yet exposing him. What He is showing us here is the exercise of a parent. Whether it touched the state of things or not, her exercises were intended to meet the great end in the service of God.

J.S. She was evidently with God.

J.T. Evidently.

A.R. Throughout the occasion in Shiloh, the Spirit of God is pleased to single out one sister.

Ques. How many do you think were at Shiloh?

J.T. A large number.

Rem. Our numbers are not so very large.

J.T. Quite so. There is one woman among all that large number. Her exercises were calculated to meet the current need.

C.A.M. It says in Corinthians, "For what knowest thou, O wife, if thou shalt save thy husband?" As if it would be a sort of constant exercise. I would like to ask about the very last sentence of this first chapter of Samuel, as to the pronoun used. It says, "And he worshipped Jehovah there". Are we right in thinking that that is to indicate that Hannah's godliness had the most wonderful result in the man?

J.T. I think it shows what an influence she had. She was the real priest in Shiloh. I think what is meant is that she influenced Eli. He was a man of that kind. She came up to Shiloh with the boy and the bullocks and the wine and told him she was the woman that prayed. She influenced Eli, so that her influence led to worship.

R.W.S. She did not have in mind the Sunday-school idea, or the young peoples' meetings. She wanted to present him before Jehovah.

J.T. She brought him up with offerings that referred to full manhood; not a pigeon or a turtledove, but it says, "she took him up with her when she had weaned him, with three bullocks, and one ephah of flour, and a flask of wine, and brought him to the house of Jehovah to Shiloh; and the boy was young". But she was thinking of manhood. She had a man in her mind.

Rem. I heard a brother say that the reason the young people were not getting on in their souls was

because they did not have young peoples' meetings. This would offset that.

J.T. The Lord is helping on that point. The idea of separating children negates the manhood thought. Manhood is shut out for the moment. I have been where they had young peoples' meetings and the assembly meeting next door. Manhood is shut out. The boy is young, but in Hannah's mind, she has great, mature thoughts. How is he to be in the house of God save in view of being a man?

Rem. In the wilderness it was one omer of manna every day. There was no division of the manna.

J.T. The youngest child got the same amount as the father, showing that the divine thought is the same for all.

A.R. This woman starts at the highest offering and brings three of them.

J.T. Quite so. And a bottle of wine. She has the right thought. It really refers to Christ. It stimulates God, speaking reverently.

T.H. I thought Zacchaeus would be that kind of man. He had a little wine. He received him joyfully.

Rem. One bullock was offered.

J.T. Quite so. What is to be dwelt upon here is what was going on in her mind, what that boy was in her mind. That child brings out her priestly mind.

T.C. How do you account for its being called the house of Jehovah? I was wondering whether it was still the tabernacle.

J.T. Oh, it was. The tabernacle was set up in Shiloh.

A.N.W. In connection with the manhood thought, can you not recognise it with the growth?

J.T. She had man in her mind. One day she would have to make a great suit for him. He was to be a man; so that the Lord says that a woman has joy because a man is born.

-.McC. As a parent, my exercise ought to be to

furnish material for the assembly instead of giving them an education in the world.

J.T. Quite so. And that your children are not any different from others. There are those who think their children are swans, when they are only ducks. They all have to come in for the governmental dealing of God. There is no use in anyone thinking that his child is any different. "That which is born of the flesh is flesh". And here Samuel did not know the Lord.

Rem. In connection with our children: they need to be converted even though they are brought up in christian households.

J.T. Certainly. Samuel did not yet know the Lord; so that a child may serve but God says, 'He does not know Me'. You must look for God dealing with the child. The best training will attain the desired end.

Ques. Would you say the child recognises God's voice?

J.T. She had to wait for that.

W.N. The Lord says in the gospels, "lead them to me". She brought him there.

J.T. Yes, and she had weaned him first. She never claimed to influence him there. She brought him to the house of Jehovah. She says, he is lent; but she meant that he was never to be recalled, and yet she is always accredited with him in Jehovah's mind. She is never lost sight of.

Rem. Say more about not knowing the Lord, when he appeared to be such a wonderful boy.

J.T. It is to show that the child was taken up in relation to the faith of the parent, and that his service is taken up from that point of view. There is nothing different, nothing incongruous about him. In chapter 3: 1 the boy ministers to Jehovah before Eli, as recognising the order that is still there. In verse 18 of the previous chapter Samuel ministered

before Jehovah, a boy girded with a linen ephod; and in verse 26, "And the boy Samuel grew on, and was in favour both with Jehovah and also with men". In chapter 3: 1, "And the boy Samuel ministered to Jehovah before Eli". Then in the end of chapter 3 we have the man. It says in verse 19, "And Samuel grew, and Jehovah was with him, and let none of his words fall to the ground. And all Israel, from Dan even to Beer-sheba, knew that Samuel was established a prophet of Jehovah".

A.R. Confirming what you said, the idea of the coat was that there was growth, whereas with the linen ephod there was no growth.

J.T. Quite so. There is no idea of it being too big for him, or too small for him. A priest must be a man.

Rem. It is remarkable that Eli says to him to say, "Speak, Lord; for thy servant heareth". He earlier did not know the Lord.

J.T. Quite so. Eli put words into his mouth, but he does not completely use them.

Rem. In Samuel's time a vision was not frequent, and things were going out. Is that not in utter contrast today?

J.T. You mean that there are communications now?

Rem. Yes.

J.T. Quite so. A vision was not frequent, the word of Jehovah was rare.

A.P.T. Is it important to read the Scriptures in the morning? There is a necessity for morning reading and prayers. It is a fine thing. These cases are due to a lack of this.

J.T. That may be. Where the word of God is brought in in the house by the head the household takes on a character in which God is honoured. Every creature of God is good, and you are impressed as you start the morning with the idea of God in creation and in redemption. It is a very great thing to start

with reading and prayer. It says the creatures are sanctified by the word of God and prayer. It is delightful to God in a man of faith.

Ques. How far would we go in giving the child an opportunity in the midst of such conditions? Samuel did something.

J.T. Give him scope. Do not say to him, 'It is not for you to speak'. Samuel acted as priest before he knew the Lord, but he is coming into it. As soon as Jehovah speaks to him, He tells him about Eli and the terrible condition in the priesthood. He does not treat him as a boy.

Rem. That is very helpful, because sometimes in a wilderness setting, the tendency is to keep things from our children; but we could well understand that in the tests of the wilderness, when the fathers were going to war, that matter would be discussed.

J.T. Quite so. The children ought to be brought up as men. Do not make them believe they are too little, because they know that well enough.

-.McC. If a brother gets on his feet the first time and makes a mistake in addressing divine Persons, would you rebuke him?

J.T. You would show him the way of the Lord more perfectly. You would not rebuke him.

-.McC. There is a way to do it.

J.T. Do not tell him not to do that again. Instruct him.

Rem. And in that there is a stimulus to the saints.

J.T. Samuel has been ministering. He ministered to Jehovah, yet he did not know Jehovah. That is he is allowed to do that, as before Eli. And then the next thing, he speaks to Jehovah and receives a communication. Now notice, it is not the boy Samuel, it is Samuel. That is the well-known man. Remember, this is written long after. It is the man now, but then he is still a boy, but he has got an

ephod on. That is in the mind of God about him.

You are to think of him as a man.

E.B. Would you say that Samuel was more priestly than Eli?

J.T. Well, yes. But Eli is not exposed yet. He is still the high priest.

-.McC. So that I have small children, but my vision is to see them men, mature, for the assembly.

J.T. The first child born into this world is called a man. And that is intentional, that is the idea. "I have acquired a man with Jehovah". A woman rejoices that a man is born into the world (John 16:21).

A.Pf. I would like to ask a question with regard to children in one family being brought up the same way, and yet coming out so differently; some have taken their place and others are going into the world.

What is the reason?

J.T. You might say that is true in almost every family. In almost every family there is one child that seems to cause more concern than others, and it is to turn the parents more to God. Hezekiah turned his face to the wall. 'Jehovah, I can do no more. It is You now, or nothing'. That is what God is looking for. You can do nothing, but God can do everything. If we just say, 'Let it go at that', nothing happens. But when you take it up with God, God will hear and will do something for you.

B.P. Job says, "I know that thou canst do everything".

J.T. Quite so.

A.P.T. David had to feel the trial of a wayward son. The most attractive is usually the worst.

J.T. This one is not coming along, God has something to say to me in that. The great point is, let the parent take it to heart and get to the Lord about it, and some day God will give you the feeling that He has heard you. In regard of Mr. Pf.'s remark, Hannah knew that the Lord heard her. It says in

chapter 1: 17, Eli said to her, "Go in peace; and the God of Israel grant thee thy petition which thou hast asked of him. And she said, Let thy bondwoman find grace in thy sight. And the woman went her way, and did eat, and her countenance was no more as before". She was conscious that God had heard.

Ques. Would you mind saying what the setting of Exodus 2 is?

J.T. You mean Moses' mother and father? How far they went to preserve the child! And God sent a saviour, for really, Pharaoh's daughter is a saviour. She was not a characteristic daughter of Pharaoh. She was a saviour, answering to the exercises of Moses' mother. God provided her.

-McC. I suppose every one in this room prays. You were speaking of God hearing our prayers. Is that normal? Should we have that consciousness normally?

J.T. I cannot say that I can say that. There are many things that you ask for and ask for and ask for. God encourages you to keep on asking; but a moment comes when you say, 'I am heard this time'. Now, Hannah had this in mind when she named her child. She says, "Because I have asked him of Jehovah", and his name means, as we know, 'heard of God', or, 'asked for of God'. It is one of the most comforting things I know of: the sense that God hears you.

Rem. Praying with prayer would be a special kind of prayer.

J.T. Quite so.

A.R. You are not only thinking of the boy in praying, you are thinking of God.

J.T. Quite so.

Rem. Abraham said, "Oh that Ishmael might live before thee!" That would have been a poor thing if it had been answered.

J.T. Think of a man like that being thrust into

the presence of God! Sarah says, 'Cast him out'. She had a right thought.

Ques. What have you to say about Eli's looseness? He restrained them not.

J.T. That is a sorrowful thing. It was too late now; he came too late. He said to his sons in chapter 2: 24, "No, my sons, for it is no good report that I hear: ye make Jehovah's people transgress. If one man sin against another, God will judge him; but if a man sin against Jehovah, who shall intreat for him? But they hearkened not to the voice of their father, for Jehovah was minded to slay them". But then before Eli said this, it says, he "was very old". Why did he not say it earlier? Why did the parent leave it so long? The children grew hardened.

Why did they not hear it before? Where were his eyes? He is an object lesson for parents in letting things go too long. If we are right with God, they will not become hardened. That is an outcome of a long course -- Jehovah was minded to slay them. Now we come to the sons of the widow, they help her with the vessels.

A.F.M. Do you think that they were encouraged to help with the vessels as under Elisha?

J.T. You notice that they go in and shut the door. The prophet says, "shut the door upon thee and upon thy sons, and pour out into all those vessels, and set aside what is full. And she went from him, and shut the door upon her and upon her sons"; that is, we get them inside with her. This is a spiritual transaction.

A.R. He says to her, "what hast thou in the house?" That would correspond with what we had this afternoon.

A.F.M. It is a contrast to what we had this afternoon.

J.T. She had the Spirit in principle, but did not value it. She did not realise how the children might

be brought into it; the development of the Spirit in the house. She shut the door and they are shut in together, and the vessels are filled in that setting.

Ques. What does that mean?

J.T. Shutting out all else.

Rem. Like the ark.

J.T. That is right, shutting out all else.

T.H. Would the idea of a prophetic word coming to us be helpful as to the door being closed?

J.T. The idea of closing the door is shutting those in who are to be helped spiritually. "The doors shut ... through fear of the Jews". It runs through Scripture. It shuts out what is inimical.

J.H. This house seems to be in order. "What hast thou in the house?" She has nothing save a pot of oil; the house seems to be in order.

J.T. Quite so. She had influence with her sons. They were carried with her in what she was doing.

Ques. Is there anything in the thought of the neighbours? She was able to go to the neighbours and borrow their vessels.

J.W. She did not do them any harm. The fact is, she had an asset, and that was capable of being enlarged itself. The process is shutting the sons in with yourself and the vessels. The idea is eliminating fleshly things, it is Romans 8.

J.S. It was really empty vessels that she borrowed.

J.T. Quite so.

A.R. What about her debt? She has a creditor to pay. She is to pay all her debt with this.

J.T. It is the righteous requirement of the law.

Rem. When the vessels are filled, the Spirit of God dwells in them.

J.T. They are able to pay all the debts and live besides.

J.S. So that she becomes morally wealthy here.

J.T. Quite so. The rich woman in Shunem.

A.P.T. There are two prophetic words to her one for the borrowing, and the other for the selling. I suppose we get more help as we go along.

J.T. Quite so. So that the opening up of this is Romans 8.

A.F.M. We might help our children on this line, not only in praying but in leading them on in their exercises as to what is of the flesh and what is of the Spirit. In helping them, we help ourselves. We help our children in bringing these things before them.

J.T. Bring them into the thing, into spiritual enlargement. Children are usually not very happy to be shut in with their mother, but they are here.

A.D. Elisha says, "thy sons", the woman said, "my two children".

G.W. Is it right for us to have debts; to buy on credit, on the instalment plan?

J.T. This is a parable. It is a type of a christian as seen in Romans 7, unable to meet his obligations; in Romans 8 he is able to meet them in the Spirit.

It is a type. Scripture says, "Owe no one anything".

A.P.T. You would not want your children to sit down to a meal if you did not pay for it. It is the practical side as well as the spiritual touch.

Rem. The neighbours might be the other meetings enlargement comes from visiting other meetings.

J.T. Quite so, linking on with the neighbouring meetings.

N.W. So the young men in the house would be impressed with the continuity of that pot of oil.

J.T. They would never forget this transaction. See how little you have spiritually become enlarged.

N.W. The riches of God's inheritance in the saints.

B.P. Would it be right for the sister to have reading and prayer with the children if her husband is not with her?

J.T. Why should she not?

Rem. Children might attempt to bring in something. She is told to shut the door; the parents shut the door, not the children.

F.C. Does the head of the house enter into this?

J.T. Well, he was a prophet, she makes a point of that. "A woman of the wives of the sons of the prophets cried to Elisha saying, Thy servant my husband is dead, and thou knowest that thy servant feared Jehovah"; so that he is honoured by her.

F.C. I was wondering if the husband would have an effect on the wife.

J.T. It would seem so. She speaks well of him. She says, "thou knowest that thy servant feared Jehovah". He is mentioned in this way to show that he was a godly man. Probably she profited by that.

J.H. She knew the good qualities.

E.B. It would appear that this woman was a bankrupt, but apparently she was not.

J.T. She had some assets, and she is enlarged. If we are with God we will not be bankrupt. She had found Christ.

THE TRUTH OF THE BODY IN ITS BEARING ON THE SAINTS (1)

Romans 12:4, 5; 1 Corinthians 10:17; 1 Corinthians 12:12 - 27

J.T. It is confidently hoped that the Lord will bless our inquiry into this subject at this time: first to see the application of the body to the saints in a public way as in that setting by faith, for the Spirit is not mentioned in Romans 12. It is a question of our public relations; and what would mark us off from ordinary bodies, for there are many such societies, is the fact we are one body by faith. And it is in Christ; one body in Christ. "Thus we, being many, are one body in Christ, and each one members one of the other" (verse 5), with a view to carrying on practical service for mutual good. There is manifestly the means of help amongst the saints. We are not left to operate at our own expense. There is a means of help, manifestly; so that we have the gift of prophecy in that service. And then in 1 Corinthians 10, following the same line, we are committed to the breaking of bread, and are, being many, one body as partakers; as a matter of our committal to the position; so as to attach our uprightness and honesty in the fellowship. And then in chapter 12 the truth seen in relation to the Spirit as vital power; baptised in the power of the one Spirit into the one body and all being made to drink into the one Spirit; so as being merged together and set in the position, the truth of the body might work in an automatic way, so that we appear to be Christ's, so much so that we are the Christ. The idea is the Spirit; the drinking consequent upon it. That is what I had in mind.

A.R.S. In the early days the truth of the one body was really dwelt on. Mr. Darby brought in how

the body was here upon earth and the Head in heaven.

J.T. That is the final thought that we come to in Colossians and Ephesians; and, of course, as it was then brought out, it is a question of the recovery of the truth and the great position of the assembly. What is always so needed is how the brethren come into this matter practically.

Ques. Would it be a matter of the responsible side? Perhaps this afternoon you had more the side of privilege.

J.T. Well, it would work out that way in Ephesians. The body is for the expression of Christ as Head. The assembly is mentioned first as the great general thought that is to prevail, but it is His body for the expression of Christ.

A.R.S. That is quite important; for the expression of Christ.

J.T. It is; and I think it brings out the necessity of our coming into it in a practical way, so that we might be available for this very position, that Christ is in expression, Himself, in us. So that Romans is the beginning from our side; Ephesians is the full thought. It is a very initial thought in Romans. "One body in Christ".

A.R.S. If we are to get real benefit, we have not only to hear what you are saying, but we have to assimilate it, take it in; so that it might come out in us.

J.T. Quite so.

A.P.T. While the truth of the body had not yet been fully revealed, why is it said, "why dost thou persecute me?" Acts 9:4?

J.T. Well, just to draw attention to the fact that they were His body. It is the first announcement we have of it, the Lord regarding the saints as Himself. It is a very forceful way of bringing the thing to attention; the allusion being to the saints whom Paul was dragging before the tribunals. It was all

very practical. So that as I am thinking of this now, it is a question of how I go into the houses of the saints; when I meet them on the street; they are Christ. That is the great general thought. But Romans is the doctrinal side, so that we have to pay attention to how it is presented.

Ques. Does the fact that the body having many members and all these members under the control of the Head suggest sympathetic and intelligent service to Christ and one another?

J.T. That is how it comes out here. It is more the status, the setting in Christ. We have not the Head here. The question arises whether we are ready to serve one another, the services that we may render to one another. We start with the truth of the body.

Rem. Would you distinguish between the thought of members in Romans 12, and 1 Corinthians 12; the way it is to be taken in both chapters?

J.T. It is the same thought. "Thus we, being many, are one body in Christ". It is a question now not of members of Christ yet, but of one another. Romans would consider how we look at the saints, so as to serve one another.

A.R. And as serving one another we look at them in Christ.

J.T. That is the thought. I think "in Christ" is our status. It is a delivering thought. We are not a body as freemasons are. We have this position which really takes us out of the world in a moral way. The link is in faith; so that we are taken at once out of the realm of human understanding, and yet it is in the eyes of men. We are to serve one another, we are objects to one another; so that we are to owe no one anything, but love. That is the obligation that stands.

C.A.M. I suppose the use of the word 'body' in that way is used differently from the way it is used

in the world. A body of people means nothing more than a group of people. Here it impresses you that it is used following all the teaching in this epistle as to our own bodies.

J.T. That is the way it would work out. The book being a foundational book, it is intended to lead us there, but on the divine foundation. And so when we come to this chapter, what is in mind is to present our bodies a living sacrifice; and the thought of the body is taken up and applied to the saints, so that it becomes very practical; and then the point is to serve. As it says, "But having different gifts, according to the grace which has been given to us, whether it be prophecy, let us prophesy according to the proportion of faith; or service, let us occupy ourselves in service; or he that teaches, in teaching", etc. (verses 6, 7). It is a question of how I am to serve the saints, and I am to clothe them in this way as one body in Christ. I am already come to an understanding about myself, and in this chapter my body is to be presented a living sacrifice so that I now follow the thought in serving the saints. I clothe them with this great thought.

A.R. I was wondering as to the idea of accept ability. It would help me to understand the truth of the position that all the other saints are acceptable to God in that sense.

J.T. I think it is included in the thought of one body in Christ. It is not yet members of Christ, but each one members one of the other. It is the brethren as I regard them. I can see this truth considers the idea of proximity in our localities, whether we are recognising those that are near, and whether we are governed mutually by this thought.

E.P. Would that come out in the apostle Paul in the way Ananias served him?

J.T. One can see what an important member he would be. The Lord had told Ananias about Paul;

what great thoughts He had as to him. How the brethren would be impressed with the importance of this member, and that he should be served properly. There was no loss in Damascus. The saints are to be viewed in that light. They are not going to suffer anything on account of me.

A.B.P. Ananias laid his hands on him.

J.T. Ananias would clothe him with the Lord's own word to him. On the other hand Saul would remember that this brother is a member of Christ. He is Christ in character.

A.F.M. They were also rendering a good service to Paul in their mode of his escape from Damascus.

J.T. I think they were. They let him down carefully. They would think of the preciousness of the contents of the basket. He alludes to it himself. And it was through a window; his outlook would not be blurred by what they were doing.

C.A.M. There were likely two sides that would strike Saul: that he had been doing violence to that body so precious to Jesus, and this slow education of how he formed a part of it.

J.T. He would remember the words of the Lord when He spoke to him first. "Why dolt thou persecute me?" Well, this brother, Ananias -- he is recognised. I must regard him in that way. He laid his hands on him and said, "Saul, brother". It would be the Lord's touch.

Ques. Is it not a question, too, of showing what an office is? Ananias would have to learn what his office was and Saul his, as members.

J.T. That is the way it would work out. Ananias would have his own thoughts about Saul, and Saul would have his thoughts about Ananias. Saul's thoughts about Ananias would be governed by what the Lord said to him, and so with Ananias.

J.H.E. Would you say that in order for this service to be rendered to Saul he had to be submissive?

It was a basket that they carried away the dead in. Some brother may not be submissive enough to go into the basket.