Corinth was Paul's foundation as regards church work and Ephesus was, in a sense, the climax or crown of his work.

• We learn in the Acts of the Apostles that Paul was a long time at both places.

• It was at Corinth that the Lord detained him. And he laboured, I think, three years and a half at Ephesus; it was long, patient labour.

• One can hardly read the Acts of the Apostles without seeing that Ephesus was really the climax of his work in connection with the assembly.

• The apostle tells the elders of Ephesus that he
  • "had not shunned to declare to them all the counsel of God".

• In the Revelation the Lord makes known to John the defection of the church, and Ephesus is seen as the point of departure; it was Ephesus that had left their "first love".

• The Lord shows to John the decline of the church which had been the great work of Paul.

• I only just refer to this because it helps to the understanding of the relative place of the two epistles.

My thought at this time is to speak of the church as God's temple. In 1 Corinthians 3 the apostle says,

• "as a wise master builder, I have laid the foundation";

• I do not therefore expect to get the truth of the complete building in Corinthians, because what is presented is elementary, a foundation.

• If I want to get the completeness of the building, what it is in the mind and counsel of God, I have to go to Ephesians. It is in the main the same idea.

• Scripture does not present the idea of two temples, but in the one case we are carried on to the temple in its completeness, and in the other you get it in a rudimentary way.

I am going to speak first as to what is presented as to it in the Ephesians, and then to look a little at what comes before us in the Corinthians,

• because the latter brings out what one might call the practical bearing of the truth, which is very important to us.

• It is very helpful in the present day to understand aright the truth of the temple, to recognise the presence of the Spirit of God here, and its consequences, for the practical result of it is that you become vessels for the manifestation of the Spirit.

• The practical denial of the presence of the Spirit is the great sin of Christendom.
  • One can see all around in professing Christianity men really gifted of God, but not in the truth of the temple, not apprehending the presence of the Spirit.

• I do not deny for a moment that they are gifted men, and that God uses them. He uses them up to the measure of the light they have;
  • but the light which should come through them is greatly obstructed, and the saints of God do not get from such persons the benefit which they ought.

• The light is obstructed to a very large extent by the human mind, for where the presence of the Spirit of God is not recognised the human mind is allowed, it is in activity in the things of God,
  • constructing them into a system, and the consequence is that the light of the Spirit is very greatly obstructed.

As I pointed out last time, in Ephesians 2 the apostle is working down from the truth of the body, or I should rather say, from the truth of the Head to the truth of the temple. He says,

• "Now therefore ye are no more strangers and foreigners, but fellow-citizens with the saints, and of the household of God; and are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone; in whom all the building fitly framed together groweth unto an holy temple in the Lord".

• We find here much the same contrast of thought to Corinthians that I referred to in connection with the body.

• The temple, as I understand it, is here identified with the glory of the kingdom. You get the same connection in the Old Testament.

• When God's people were wanderers, moving about from place to place through the wilderness, God walked with them in a tent; God did not dwell in a temple then.

• The idea of a temple did not connect itself with the wanderings of God's people in the wilderness, but with a city and a fixed habitation. It speaks of the temple in Psalm 78,
  • "He built his sanctuary like high palaces".

• But so long as the people of God were wanderers in the wilderness, God dwelt in a tent, that is, in grace He came down to their condition. There is a beautiful feature of grace in that.

• The temple connected itself in the Old Testament with the glory of the kingdom, and it was not until the man of peace, Solomon, reigned, that the temple was built.

• David was not allowed to build God a house, because he had shed much blood; but when the enemies were subdued, and the kingdom was established in peace in Solomon, then Solomon builds God a house.

• David and Solomon both form a type of Christ – David as subduing the enemies, Solomon as reigning in peace.

I believe what I say as to the connection between the kingdom and the temple is confirmed by the fact that when the eternal state is spoken of in the Revelation, the kingdom having been delivered up,

• the idea of a temple is dropped, and the expression employed is that
  • "the tabernacle of God is with men".

• God does not cease to dwell with men, He is their God and they are His people.

The thought of the temple in Ephesians connects itself, as I understand it, with the counsels of God in their accomplishment in the kingdom,

• "the administration of the fulness of times",

• which is identical with the kingdom. So we find a later allusion to the kingdom in chapter 5, that
  • "no … idolater hath any inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and of God".

• In the kingdom Christ is supreme, Christ is Lord. It is the mediatorial kingdom, which, though not exactly a Scripture term, is one which conveys the idea well,
  • for Christ is the Mediator, and all the good which God has for man is administered in power through Christ.

• What is true now to faith will be true then in a public way. We get the blessings of the kingdom;
  • "the kingdom of God is not meat and drink; but righteousness, and peace, and joy in the Holy Ghost";

• but when the kingdom is established, righteousness, peace, and joy will rule in a public way through the Lord Jesus Christ; He will reign; and it will be the kingdom of God and of Christ;
  • "The kingdoms of this world are become the kingdoms of our Lord, and of his Christ; and he shall reign for ever and ever".

Now we find here that

• "all the building fitly framed together groweth".

• The temple is not here looked at as complete, but as growing, that is, growing spiritually,
  • "unto an holy temple in the Lord".

• The expression "in the Lord" appears to me to connect the temple with the kingdom. As I said before, what will mark the kingdom will be the glory and supremacy of Christ.

• He is Lord to faith now, Lord to those who believe, and in the kingdom He will be publicly supreme and Lord.

• What faith gets now, peace, and grace, and reconciliation, will be for the earth then, for God's people down here;
  • He will be Head and Husband of His people, and Head of the Gentiles; and these blessings which faith now enjoys will be brought into the world through the Lord Jesus Christ.

• Here we have, that the whole building
  • "fitly framed together groweth unto an holy temple in the Lord".

• When it is viewed in the light of the kingdom, there is no hand of man seen in it, there is no work of man recorded at all;
  • it is "fitly framed together", it "groweth", indicating that there is a divine energy in every part of it – it "groweth unto an holy temple",

• where there is nothing which can defile, "an holy temple in the Lord", in the One Who is supreme in the administration of the kingdom.

That is the view which is taken of the temple here; and we are further told this, it is

• "built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets",

• that is, on the foundation of their testimony, for apostles and prophets are viewed as identified with their testimony, and the chief corner-stone is Jesus Christ.

• Paul speaks in Corinthians of Jesus Christ as the foundation that had been laid; and in Ephesians Jesus Christ is the chief corner-stone. There is no decline in the character.

Just one thought in corroboration of this which we can gather from the Revelation in the heavenly city.

• I am not confounding the two ideas, for no two ideas presented to us in Scripture are to be confounded;
  • many ideas in Scripture run parallel, and every idea is distinct and unique, but one often serves to illustrate another.

• Now in the heavenly city, the new Jerusalem, the foundations are garnished with all manner of precious stones; that is, distinctiveness is maintained, but everywhere there is refracted light; that is the idea of a precious stone. And the gates of the city
  • "were twelve pearls, every several gate was of one pearl".

• The foundation is the beginning, and the gates are the completion of a city, as we read in the Old Testament, that the foundations of Jericho were laid in Hiel's firstborn, and the gates set up in his youngest son.

• It is exceedingly beautiful thus to see that there is no diminution in the perfectness of the city.

• So, too, in the temple the foundation is Jesus Christ; and Jesus Christ is the chief corner-stone.

I do not think we have exactly the same idea in Corinthians. It says there,

• "Know ye not that ye are the temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwelleth in you?"

• I doubt if that will be the form in which God will dwell in the temple in the kingdom; but it is the form in which God is now dwelling.

• The verse in Corinthians which I have just quoted connects itself to a certain extent with the thought in the last verse of this chapter,
  • "In whom ye also are built together for a habitation of God in the Spirit"; that is present.

• It is the status of Jew and Gentile as builded together by human instrumentality; it is not "fitly framed together"; that is connected with the temple.

• There are thus two ideas; one is of the temple, which connects itself with the kingdom, and the other of the habitation of God, which is present; that is, that God is dwelling here Spirit-wise, by the Spirit.

I do not propose to say much more on that side. My object in referring to Ephesians 2 was rather to show the church as the temple of God;

• and I believe it is the temple of God, as being the body of Christ.

• Everybody here may not quite grasp the connection of the two thoughts; but each successive truth which comes out in Ephesians 2 flows from the truth of the body, or rather of the head and the body, with which the subject begins.

• The church could not but be the temple of God if it is the body of Christ, as the Lord's own body when He was down here could not but be the temple of God, for the simple reason that of necessity God was there.

Now we will turn to 1 Corinthians 3: 16:

• "Know ye not that ye are the temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwelleth in you? If any man defile the temple of God, him shall God destroy; for the temple of God is holy, which temple ye are".

• I trust the Lord may enable me to suggest a few thoughts in connection with this passage, which is of great importance to us practically.

• Here you come on to different ground from that in Ephesians. The counsel of God is not the prominent thought here;
  • it is the prominent thought in Ephesians 2, and therefore the whole building is said to be fitly framed together, and to grow unto a holy temple.

• Here it is somewhat different; the building is looked at in connection with the responsible work of man, and this is another side of the truth.

• It is a very great thing to see the two sides of a truth in Scripture; the same truth may be presented on the one side in connection with the counsel of God, and on the other in connection with the responsibility of man.

• Hence being viewed on the latter side you get here the possibility of the temple of God being defiled, and judgment coming upon the defiler.

Now I can understand the question being asked, in fact I have asked it myself many times, Why is the thought of the temple introduced in Corinthians?

• I believe it is because the kingdom is true to faith, though no one would venture to say that the kingdom is yet manifested. Christ is Lord to faith, and so the kingdom is true to faith.

• Therefore, on the same principle, the temple is true to faith; that is, that what will have its accomplishment, its full result hereafter in the day of the glory of Christ, is already true for faith.

• That is a great principle in Christianity. Everything that is established for God in Christ, is true to faith. Otherwise, how would you understand the passage in Hebrews 12,
  • "Ye are come unto mount Sion, and unto the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to an innumerable company of angels, to the general assembly and church of the firstborn, which are written in heaven, and to God the Judge of all, and to the spirits of just men made perfect, and to Jesus the mediator of the new covenant, and to the blood of sprinkling, that speaketh better things than that of Abel".

• You could not understand that passage if you did not see that every item in it is established in Christ; you could not otherwise be said to have "come" to it;
  • but the fact is, that having come in faith to Christ, you have come to all which is established in Christ.

• Therefore you have come to the kingdom in that sense:
  • "We receiving a kingdom which cannot be moved".

• It is my conviction that so far as God is concerned, every purpose and counsel is settled and established in Christ:
  • "All the promises of God in him are yea, and in him Amen, unto the glory of God by us"; that is, by faith.

• You are entitled in faith to take up all these things; they are all good for faith, the kingdom is good for faith,
  • and so, too, the temple, for Christ is in glory, and the glory of God is displayed in Him;

  • and the Spirit of God being here, the apostle takes up the thought of the temple in connection with man's responsibility.

There is another point in connection with the church which I would like to bring forward by the grace of God, and that is, it forms as the temple a link between the past and the future.

• Do you think that if God has once established His temple upon earth He gives up the idea of a temple?
  • Once God has set up His temple here, you may be sure man cannot abolish it.

• The temple at Jerusalem was God's sanctuary, in the place of His choice.

• One of the most instructive studies that I know of in the Old Testament is the close of Psalm 78.

• God had rejected Shiloh, and the tabernacle in which He dwelt among men. He chose not the tribe of Ephraim with which Shiloh was connected; but
  • He "chose the tribe of Judah, the mount Zion which he loved";

  • He chose David; He took him from the sheepfolds to feed Jacob, His people,

  • "and he built his sanctuary like high palaces, like the earth which he hath established for ever".

• That is what God did; and nothing can set it aside.

• Because of God's temple at Jerusalem, kings are to bring presents unto Him. But God could say to a stiff-necked people,
  • "the most High dwelleth not in temples made with hands",

• and hence in the setting aside of Jerusalem, the church, as God's temple, forms a link between the past and the future; that is,
  • the thought of the temple is not given up, only instead of the temple being local and material, as it has been and will be, it is now composed of living stones;

  • "Know ye not that ye are the temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwelleth in you?"

There is another point of interest in connection with the church;

• you do not find the thought of the temple coming out until in a certain sense there was freedom from Jerusalem.

• In the first phase of the church, as is seen in the earlier part of the Acts of the Apostles, Jerusalem was looked upon as a church centre;
  • and when a serious question arose at Antioch it was referred to the apostles and elders at Jerusalem, and Paul and Silas went about afterwards in every direction carrying the decrees of the apostles and elders.

• Doubtless divine wisdom was in it, but I think saints had to learn the truth that the Holy Spirit was sufficient for the assembly apart from Jerusalem.

• And that is the ground which Paul takes in the epistle to the Corinthians, when he says,
  • "Know ye not that ye are the temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwelleth in you".

• I think Paul was the first who began to build distinctly on that foundation, and a very important foundation it was, too; for the time came when, in the judgment of God, Jerusalem could be no longer a centre.

• God allowed it at first in divine wisdom, that the work should be consolidated in Jew and Gentile; but it was a state of things which was not destined to continue.

It is to be noticed that in the first epistle to the Corinthians there are three leading truths:

1. the first is the temple;

2. the second is the body – "the Christ" really;

3. and the third is the victory over death, in connection with the prophecy, "Death is swallowed up in victory".

• And these privileges, which belong to God's people upon earth in a literal way, belong now to the church in a spiritual way;

1. for saints are the temple of God, a privilege which is proper to Israel;

2. they have the Christ, for they are His body;

3. and they have the victory given them over death.

I have said that in Corinthians the temple is connected with man's responsibility; the warning is introduced,

• "If any man defile the temple of God, him shall God destroy".

• In the point of view in which the building is looked at in Ephesians, "fitly framed together groweth unto an holy temple in the Lord", there is no possibility of defilement coming in. But in any case,
  • "The temple of God is holy";

• that is, the temple of God has that character, and woe be to the man that corrupts it.

• I have no hesitation in saying that the temple of God has been corrupted, and the worst principles have been introduced into it; no one can know the history of the professing church without knowing that.

• But the consequence of it will be that judgment will come upon the corrupters.

• If anyone were to ask me who is the great corrupter of the church of God, I should say the Pope, because he is the head of the great corrupting system; and I do not doubt that system will specially come under the destruction of God.

• Depend upon it, God will vindicate the holiness of His temple. But man is responsible to maintain it; that is the point here.

• There is no responsibility in Ephesians 2; but there is responsibility here; that is, that saints are responsible to maintain the holiness of God's temple, because the Spirit of God dwells there.

I want now to give you one or two ideas connected with the temple.

• The first and by far the most important point is this, that God is there. That is the great idea of the temple, and that is the very thing which Christendom has practically lost.

• They have gone back to material things, to a bygone age, and have lost the sense of the presence of the Spirit of God.

• What must be the first principle with us is that God is here.

• If you ask me what has the responsibility of being the house of God, I say that Christendom has that responsibility, though it has become like a great house in which are all kinds of vessels; but God is here by the Spirit.

• There are two very important points connected with the temple of God which flow from this – grace is there and light.

• I see these two principles in the shewbread and in the candlestick in Israel's temple.

• Go back for a moment to Corinth, and think of its condition, and of the idolatrous people there.

• If anyone desired to get any light as to God, or any idea of the grace of God, where could it be found? In the Christian company and nowhere else;
  • it came out there, because they recognised the presence of God, that God was dwelling here by the Spirit, and what characterised the dwelling of God was grace and light.

• To know anything about law people might have gone to Jerusalem; but to know anything about grace and light, they would have to go to the Christian company, where alone they would find it expressed.

In connection with that, while fully admitting that Christendom has the responsibility of being the house of God, still if you ask me where the manifestations of the Spirit come out,

• I reply that the manifestations of the Spirit come out through the body.

• Many persons in early days evidently fell under the power and influence of the Spirit, who had no part in the Spirit. But it is of real Christians it is said,
  • "By one Spirit are we all baptised into one body … and have been all made to drink into one Spirit".

• The manifestations of the Spirit are set in the church as the body of Christ. I see many a gifted man who is undoubtedly in the body of Christ,
  • and yet knows nothing at all about the truth of the body nor of the presence of God here by the Spirit;

• he looks upon the house of God as a material building; a building of brick or stone, a place of worship; and therefore, although he is a member of the body of Christ, he is not very serviceable;
  • there may be a manifestation of the Spirit there, but the light of the Spirit is greatly obstructed, because he allows, to a large degree, his mind to work.

• If the presence of the Spirit is not recognised, man always allows his mind to work.

• Men are sent to college to train them for the ministry, and to study systems of theology and the like, which are the work of men's minds.

• And they feed upon these things and get their ideas formed by them, and the light is thus greatly obscured.

• I do not deny that the manifestation of the Spirit may be there, but it is greatly marred where the presence of the Spirit is not recognised,
  • and if you recognise that God is dwelling here by the Spirit, you will recognise that it is only the spiritual person who can appreciate His presence.

• You can bring nothing but what is of God into contact with the Spirit of God. And that is what the apostle urges at the close of 1 Corinthians 2, it is the spiritual man discerns all things; and the Corinthians were not spiritual.

• They were the temple of God, and the Spirit of God dwelt in them, but everything was in confusion among them, because they were not spiritual.

• It raises a very important question with us as to what "spiritual" means. It is a very simple word to my mind; it is not attainment, I should reject the thought of attainment; it is clearly the normal and proper condition of every saint.

• What I understand by a person being spiritual is that the flesh is subdued and the Spirit is the power of apprehension and the source and spring of thought and feeling.

• And that ought to be the case with every one of us; we all have part in the Spirit, the Spirit of God dwells in us, and therefore the Spirit of God ought to rule completely in us.

• The Spirit of God is to be the spring of activity, as well as the power of understanding, for you cannot understand anything of God by the natural mind.

• There is nothing I dread more in the things of God than the activity of my mind. I know that the instant my mind begins to be active in divine things I am in danger; I never get anything lasting by it.

• I do not set aside the mind; but in the Christian the mind is simply an eye, it lets in light, that is all.

• I could not understand the things of God without a mind; but if you want to understand the things of God, you must guard against the activity of the mind;
  • what you want is to be subject to the Spirit of God and to judge the flesh, and then you will very soon get an understanding in the things of God.

• You get understanding by the Spirit, because the Spirit brings the mind of Christ. I understand all the things of God by the Spirit of God.

• The first point I recognise is this, the Spirit of God is here, the saints
  • "are builded together for an habitation of God through the Spirit".

• Then I recognise, that not only is the Spirit present, but that there are the manifestations of the Spirit, and they are all placed in the church as the body of Christ.

I am no longer speaking of the temple in connection with the glory of the kingdom,

• I am speaking of the temple in connection with man's responsibility.

• Of course the very fact of saints being the temple of God is an immense privilege; but the thing is viewed also upon the responsibility side.

• The first practical thing for us is that we should covet by the grace of God to be spiritual. We ought all to covet to be spiritual, that is,
  • that the Spirit of God should be really in us the power of understanding, and the spring of thought and activity, governing the mind and feelings.

• If the presence of the Spirit is recognised in the soul, then I say where the Spirit of God is, there is wonderful sense of light and grace.

• Then, as belonging to the body, we are vessels for the manifestation of the Spirit. But take care you do not obstruct the light.

• You are to be here a vessel of light and grace; do not let anything hinder the light which ought to shine out through you, and the grace that ought to be manifest in you.

I have only one thing more to add. All good which God has for man comes out through the body of Christ,

• just as when Christ was here upon earth the good that God had for man came out through His body.

• What God had to say to men, and all the good works which God had for men came out through Him;
  • "there went virtue out of him, and healed them all"; it all came out through His body.

• And so the good which God has for man now is by the Spirit, through the body of Christ, the church; that is the channel of it.

May God give to us understanding to recognise what I would call the first cardinal truth as to the church, that is, that saints are the temple of God, for God is dwelling here by the Spirit.

• I first want to give an idea of the force of the expression, "the house of God", as we gather it from Scripture. The house of God is the church of the living God.

• Two expressions are used as to the church; it is the body of Christ, and it is the house of God. The latter occurs in 1 Timothy 3, where the apostle says,
  • "These things I write unto thee … that thou mayest know how thou oughtest to behave thyself in the house of God, which is the church of the living God".

• It is a great point for us, and where the truth becomes practical, to see the moral features which were to characterise the house of God;
  • because whatever may be its present ruin, we may return to those moral features when we cannot revive the house of God as it was at first.

• And when the house of God has become practically what is spoken of in the second epistle to Timothy, "a great house", and it has now that character, and you have to purge yourselves from vessels to dishonour,
  • the call is to return to the truth as it was from the beginning.

• Thus it is very important to know what are the true characteristics of the house of God. It is for that purpose that I read the passage in 1 Timothy.

Now, my practical difficulty is to distinguish between the temple of God, on which I dwelt last time, and the house of God.

• There is evidently a connection in the two thoughts, but also a clear distinction between them.

• Both are true; there is the temple of God, and there is the house of God; and I trust to be enabled to make the distinction clear before I pass on to speak of what characterises the house of God.

• Referring for a moment to the truth of the temple, I notice that the temple of God is not spoken of as a present thing, except in connection with a local assembly;
  • and on the other hand, a local assembly is not spoken of as the house of God.

• I can understand Ephesians 2: 22, where it says,
  • "In whom ye also are builded together for an habitation of God through the Spirit",

• being advanced against this. But I think the idea there is not that of a local assembly, but the more general one of Jew and Gentile builded together for a habitation of God by the Spirit.

• And wherever else the house of God is spoken of, it is either in the catholic epistles or in the epistles to individuals.

• You find it in Hebrews, in the first epistle of Peter, and in the first epistle to Timothy, and perhaps in the second;
  • but in no case is it referred to in an epistle written to a particular church; that is, the idea of the house of God is more general and extended.

• On the other hand, it is important to remember that, as I said, the temple of God is not spoken of as a present thing, except in connection with a local assembly.

• Of course there is the other thought, in the epistle to the Ephesians,
  • "all the building fitly framed together groweth unto an holy temple in the Lord";

• but that does not present the temple as a present complete thing here.

The apostle's point in bringing forward to the Corinthians the truth of the temple is to show them that they lacked no kind of privilege which properly belonged to the people of God down here.

• God's temple, the Christ, and the victory over death were theirs, for the kingdom was established, at all events the kingdom in mystery.

• Now I deduce from this, that the idea of the temple is privilege; privilege belonging to a local assembly.

• What the privilege meant I tried to indicate last week – that the grace and light of God were present in the company in whom the Spirit dwelt.
  • And the apostle brings this forward in order to meet the evil of attaching importance to man as such.

• Light from God and grace were present in the temple, and therefore man and man's mind were nowhere there;
  • the one who dwelt in the temple was the Spirit, and the spiritual man was the only man of any account in the temple of God.

The house of God is on the other hand a truth of wider bearing. Let us go back for a moment to the Old Testament;

• the tabernacle was the house of God, but then the thought of the house of God took in not merely the tent, but the whole surroundings; the court of the tabernacle was as much a part of the house of God as was the tabernacle itself.

• So, too, with the temple; the courts of the temple were of the house of God as well as the temple itself, though the scripture is careful to distinguish between the building, that is, the actual temple, and the more general idea.

• For instance, I think I might say that the Lord never went into the temple, that is, into the actual building – the shrine, so to speak – because He was not of the priestly family:
  • "If he were on earth, he should not be a priest".

• Morally, too, the temple was superseded by His presence here; He says,
  • "Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up"; "but he spake of the temple of his body".

• But He still acknowledged the temple as His Father's house, and He taught in the courts of the temple; He was ever to be found, when He went to Jerusalem, teaching in the courts of the temple whither the Jews resorted.

In the passage I read in Mark,

• "He taught, saying unto them, Is it not written, My house shall be called of all nations the house of prayer?"

• That was the proper character of God's house.

• The house takes in the whole idea; not simply of the building, but of the courts which surrounded the building; and in that sense it was God's house, a house of prayer for all nations.

• I think if you have followed me you will see the distinction there is between the temple and the house of God;
  • that the temple, properly speaking, refers to the building, and in this sense it is used in 1 Corinthians 3,

  • and the house of God is a larger thought, which takes in not only the actual building, but the precincts of the building.

• Then again, as to the house of God, we gather from what is written that it was not simply to be the place of priestly service, but to be characterised by being a house of prayer for all nations.

Now I think I can point out to you the same distinction both in Corinthians and in the Revelation, and if I succeed, it will give you a pretty clear idea

• on the one hand of the temple – which is connected with privilege, the grace and light of God being there –

• and on the other hand of the house of God, which refers to profession.

• Turn to 1 Corinthians 1: 2:
  • "To the assembly of God which is in Corinth" – mark the next part of the verse –

  • "to those sanctified in Christ Jesus, called saints" – and then mark

  • – "with all that in every place call on the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, both theirs and ours".

• Now it is perfectly clear that you get two distinct ideas in that verse;
  1. on the one hand, those addressed are seen as
     • "sanctified in Christ Jesus, called saints";

  2. on the other hand, there is the recognition of profession, but of profession in the right and true sense, not the kind of profession which is abroad in the present day;
     • "with all that in every place call on the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, both theirs and ours".

• What I make of it is this; in the first part of the verse is the principle of the temple; in the latter part I see the principle of the house.

• Because I do not understand the temple of God to be composed of anything but living stones; it is a "spiritual house".

• The Corinthians are looked at in that sense as "sanctified in Christ Jesus, called saints", and the apostle can say that they are the temple of God, and the Spirit of God dwelt in them.

• But then the apostle recognises also in a general way the profession of those who call on the Lord, that is, that they were the house of God; I think the first part of the epistle goes largely on that ground.

• In chapter 3, in speaking about the temple, I think the apostle alludes to what was their spiritual privilege.

• The word which is used for "temple" in that chapter is not the general idea of the building and its courts in the external sense, but a word which is specially applied to the building itself, the shrine.

In Revelation 11 there is a passage which I think gives us the same thought. John says,

• "There was given me a reed like unto a rod: and the angel stood, saying, Rise, and measure the temple of God, and the altar, and them that worship therein".

• Now mark, there you have what is real; it is not Christianity which is in view, but at all events real saints.

• And the temple is distinguished from the altar, although both temple and altar were included in the house.

• It is the temple of God, and the altar, and the worshippers; in other words, it is those who had a real living link with God.
  • "But", he says, "the court which is without the temple" – which is included in the general idea of the house – "leave out, and measure it not; for it is given unto the Gentiles"

• that is, the outward profession of Judaism in that day is given up unto the Gentiles –
  • "and the holy city shall they tread under foot forty and two months".

• The Spirit of God first distinguishes real saints, and then speaks of the public outward profession, which is included in the idea of the house, just as the court was included in the idea of the house, and that is given up to the Gentiles for the last half week of Daniel.

• I bring the passage forward, because it is a very distinct recognition of the inward and outward, and both included in the general idea of the house of God.

I believe that we have sometimes looked at the temple of God in 1 Corinthians 3 as analogous to the house of God; but I do not think it is.

• The apostle brings before the Corinthians in chapter 3 their proper privilege, as being God's temple, just as in the similar thought of "the Christ" in chapter 12;
  • it was not simply that they had the temple of God, but they were the temple of God.

• And I think the idea of the temple as a spiritual house just accords with the first epistle of Peter; "a spiritual house", "a holy priesthood", and so on.

• In the first epistle to the Corinthians the truth is brought out that they were a spiritual house; in the second epistle that they were a holy priesthood.

• But in chapter 1 of the first epistle he joins with them all that call on the name of the Lord Jesus, "both theirs and ours".

• Now if you want me to put it in simple, plain language, the house of God, as I understand it, is the profession of Christianity.

• Just bear in mind that the expression "house of God" is not found as far as I am aware, in connection with the local assembly any more than the kingdom is.
  • It is the profession of Christianity here upon earth which has the responsibility of being the house of God.

• I fully admit it has lapsed into the character of "a great house"; but in its normal condition, it was properly those who called on the name of the Lord Jesus.

• In speaking of profession, I do not, as I have said, mean unreal profession, but what the world could take account of; it was public.

There are some verses in Hebrews 3 which perhaps will give us the thought of it:

• "Wherefore, holy brethren, partakers of the heavenly calling, consider the Apostle and High Priest of our profession, Christ Jesus; who was faithful to him that appointed him, as also Moses was faithful in all his house.

  "For this man was counted worthy of more glory than Moses, inasmuch as he who hath builded the house hath more honour than the house. For every house is builded by some man; but he that built all things is God.

  "And Moses verily was faithful in all his house" – that is, God's house – "as a servant, for a testimony of those things which were to be spoken after;

  "but Christ as Son over his house" – not 'His own house', but God's house – "whose house are we, if we hold fast the confidence and the rejoicing of the hope firm unto the end".

• There are two or three very important thoughts in this passage; and the first is that the house of God in the largest extent of it is all things.

• The tabernacle was the pattern of the universe of God, that is, the universe in which the ways of God are displayed in their result.

• It has often been remarked that there was a sort of picture there of the three heavens; but I take it that what was taught in the tabernacle was the way in which God connected Himself with the universe, and that the tabernacle in that sense was the pattern of all things.

• I believe it will come out in that way; and that, as the issue of the ways of God, the whole universe will have the character of being the house of God.

• Then there is another thought connected with the passage, that Christ is Son over God's house.

• Moses was a servant, and faithful in the type and figure of it; but Christ is Son over God's house; that is His place in connection with the universe of God.

• Then we get a third thought, that at this time Christians constitute the house of God. As the apostle says,
  • "whose house are we, if we hold fast" – we are on the ground of responsibility – to "hold fast the confidence and the rejoicing of the hope firm unto the end".

• It is the recognition of Christian profession, and of its place of privilege.

• And it is to be remarked that the epistle to the Hebrews is not an epistle addressed to a particular church, but a kind of treatise for Jewish Christians.

• The house of God is not spoken of as the privilege of any particular local assembly; but the apostle is speaking generally of Christianity.

There is one verse also in 1 Peter 4: 17:

• "For the time is come that judgment must begin at the house of God: and if it first begin at us, what shall the end be of them that obey not the gospel of God?"

• The apostle in the opening verses of the epistle had addressed himself
  • "to the strangers scattered throughout Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia".

• The epistle to the Hebrews was written very possibly for the help of Jewish Christians in the land; the epistles of Peter were addressed to the Jews of the dispersion.

• In the verse that I read we find that those who profess Christ – that is the "us" – are those who constitute the house of God. He says,
  • "The time is come that judgment must begin at the house of God";

• and if it first begin at "us", there you get the identification of Christian profession with the house of God. And the house of God in its present constitution is subject to the judgment of God.

• I do not think you could say that God will judge the temple; God will destroy the defiler, but the temple of God comes out holy.

• On the other hand, the house of God, the "court without", as in the Revelation, the external profession of Christianity, is subject to the judgment of God.

• The house of God will come to an end in its present character; but the idea of the house of God does not come to an end, because in result all things constitute the house of God; and Christ is Son over God's house.

• I trust I have made the points clear; evidently the thought of the house of God in its present aspect refers to the outward profession of Christianity.

Now I must guard that by one remark. The common idea that people have of profession in the present day is that it must always be mere profession; the expression 'profession' is often put in contradistinction to possession.

• But the two things ought to go together, profession and possession.

• It is a great mistake to put aside profession, and say it is worth nothing at all. It is very important, and carries with it responsibility; the house of God is judged on the ground of the profession they make.

• Every one of us here tonight is a professed Christian, we all call on the name of the Lord Jesus; but I trust we all have possession, the indwelling of the Holy Spirit.

• The five wise virgins were right to have lamps; but they not only had lamps, but oil in their vessels with their lamps.
  • The five foolish virgins had lamps, that is, the mark of external profession, but they had not the oil in their vessels with their lamps; their lights burnt for a time, but there was no spiritual power to sustain the light, and hence they were not ready for the bridegroom.

• Profession is a right thing enough, and an intended thing on the part of God; the terrible part is the possibility of having profession without the Holy Spirit.

• You see it all around in the present day, Christian profession without an atom of spiritual power or discernment; mere profession, as you would call it.

• But profession in itself is right, and distinguishes from the world.

• The world cannot tell whether I have the Holy Spirit, and am a member of Christ;
  • but the world can tell whether I am professedly a Christian, and whether I am consistent with my profession; that is what the world can see.

I desire now to give you some of the marks and features which are proper to the house of God. The verse in Mark 11 gives us, I think, a great idea of the house of God: Jesus taught them, saying,

• "Is it not written, My house shall be called of all nations the house of prayer? but ye have made it a den of thieves".

• There is not any allusion in that passage to anything connected with the worship of God or the temple service; but the Lord speaks, as in Isaiah 56: 7, of the house of God as being a house of prayer for all nations.

• It is really, if I understand it, the point where God put Himself in contact with those who were outside His people; it was a house of prayer for all nations.

• I think we get the same principle in 1 Timothy 2, in these verses:
  • "I exhort therefore, that first of all, supplications, prayers, intercessions, and giving of thanks, be made for all men; for kings, and for all that are in authority; that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and honesty".

• As I understand it, it is in God's house that God puts Himself in a sense in touch with all men. That brings in the first feature, which is to characterise the house of God – prayer for all men.

• Christians are not to be indifferent to the welfare of all men, nor indeed to the government of God down here; and therefore the saints are put in the place of intercession, and prayer is to be the great characteristic of the house of God.

Mark now the verses that follow.

• "For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Saviour; who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth".

• The truth resided in the saints, in the house, but the thought of God went out to all men.

• It has been said that if the meetings were indifferent to the gospel, to the thought of "all men", they would wither.

• Such was not the thought of God at all; and the church was in the place of intercession on behalf of all men on the ground that God
  • "will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth".

• The apostle goes on to say,
  • "For there is one God, and one mediator" – not between men and God, but – "between God and men, the man Christ Jesus; who gave himself a ransom for all".

• The truth of it was in the house, and it was in the house that the attitude of God toward all men was known; and therefore the church was to make intercession for all men,
  • "that we might live a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and honesty";

• that is, that there might be no hindrance to the promulgation of God's thought and will in regard to all men, that God
  • "would have all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth";

• there was adequate ground for it in that Christ had given Himself "a ransom for all".

Nothing is a greater hindrance to the truth than the exclusive use of one side of the truth.

• Take an Arminian on the one hand, or a Calvinist on the other; both are great hinderers of the truth, because they each take up one side of the truth and exclude the other.

• What we want is the even balance between the two.

• I believe on the one hand in the truth of election; I am perfectly confident you could have no security for anything without it; if God is going to have a family in heaven, it must be an elect family.

• But on the other hand, I find the truth equally clearly stated in Scripture, that "there is … one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus; who gave himself a ransom for all".

What I have said gives you, I think, the position of the house of God. And here it is not a question of a local assembly, it is the position of Christian profession,

• on the one hand in regard to God,

• and on the other in regard to all men;

• and the first great characteristic of Christian profession is prayer; the house of God is to be marked by prayer.

• You get no idea here of the temple or of the holiest, but the marks of the true profession of Christianity; the men are to pray everywhere.

I pursue the passage. It says,

• "I will therefore that men pray everywhere, lifting up holy hands, without wrath and doubting.

  "In like manner also, that women adorn themselves in modest apparel, with shamefacedness and sobriety; not with braided hair, or gold, or pearls, or costly array; but (which becometh women professing godliness) with good works.

  "Let the women learn in silence with all subjection. But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence. For Adam was first formed, then Eve.

  "And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression. Notwithstanding she shall be saved in childbearing, if they continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety".

• Again I make the remark that the apostle is not concerned with a meeting, a local assembly; but with the proper character of Christian profession.

• The house of God is to be marked by piety and decorous demeanour; what is to mark the men is prayer; and what is to adorn the women is good works.

• Those are two things which were to be seen – the men praying "everywhere, lifting up holy hands, without wrath and doubting", and the women adorned not with what might make them conspicuous in this world, but with good works.

• The activity is in a sense more connected with the men, and the adornment with the women; but each is to have its own proper character and direction.

I often think how little we carry out these things, how little the men are characterised by prayer.

• It is not 'men' simply, but "the men"; that is, the men who are within the sphere of the house of God, Christian profession.

• I think it refers to prayer in public, and not merely in private; but the point is not exactly the occasion of it, but what is to characterise the men.

• When we come together to pray, it puts all of us to shame that we are so little prepared for prayer; and yet the men in the house of God are to be marked by prayer.

• So, too, in regard to women; there is to be the absence of the adornment that passes current in the world, "but (which becometh women professing godliness) with good works".

• The point is that the adornment of the women is not to be external but moral; and a beautiful adornment it is! Elsewhere, the adornment mentioned is that of
  • "a meek and quiet spirit, which is in the sight of God of great price".

• A woman is not to be conspicuous, because she has to bow her head in remembrance that Eve was in the transgression. Adam was not deceived, the woman was deceived.
  • "The serpent beguiled Eve by his subtilty";

• the man entered into the transgression; and the woman, as having been in the transgression, has to accept it,
  • and is to be adorned – you can understand the contrast – by good works, and to be in all subjection to the man.

• That is the relative place of the man and the woman in the house of God, where God, as it were, touches man, and where prayer and intercession go up to God for all men.

There are two other features given in the third chapter which mark the house of God, oversight and ministry.

• You could not conceive God's house being a scene of confusion, or uncared for; such a thought would not be worthy of God;
  • "God is not the author of confusion".

• When I speak of ministry, I do not refer to ministry in a spiritual sense, but as meeting temporal needs.

• There was to be oversight in regard to men's souls, and ministry in regard to their bodies; those were the two things which were to be seen in the house of God, for the house of God was regulated of God; it was where God was. Hence it says,
  • "If a man desire the office of a bishop" – that is, an overseer – "he desireth a good work".

• A man was justified in coveting the office of an overseer. And the marks of the overseer are given in order that one who was competent to be such might be recognised.

• Then, too, there was ministry for temporal needs; and not on the part of men only, but on the part of women; for there is the recognition, not only of deacons but of deaconesses, and the qualifications are given here also.

There is no such thing as an appointing power now; but the qualifications are given in order that an elder or a deacon might be recognised.

• A man who desired the office of an overseer desired a good work, but he must have the necessary marks; he must be a married man and have children,
  • he proves his competency to exercise oversight in the house of God by the way in which he rules his own family.

• If a man had a disorderly family, if he had not his own children in subjection, though he might be a teacher or might have some other gift, yet he was not competent to be an elder and to care for the house of God.

• So, too, with regard to a deacon; a deacon was to be a married man, or else he could not well enter into his work, and he was to have an orderly house.

• There is an important word in connection with the deacon, that those who
  • exercise "the office of a deacon well purchase to themselves a good degree, and great boldness in the faith which is in Christ Jesus".

• It has often been noticed, and I think truly, that this was exemplified in the case of Stephen; he began by being a deacon, and afterwards he became a most distinguished witness of Christ;
  • he purchased to himself "a good degree, and great boldness in the faith which is in Christ Jesus".

Then the apostle tells Timothy the reason he writes. He writes,

• "hoping to come unto thee shortly: but if I tarry long, that thou mayest know how thou oughtest to behave thyself in the house of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth".

• It is a very great thing for a man to know how he is to behave himself in the house of God, that is, in the sphere of Christian profession, especially one in the place of a servant.

There is a further thought. Even in the apostle's day, alas! you see profession parting company from possession, and the house of God becoming "a great house";

• and hence the apostle saw the need of saints purging themselves from vessels to dishonour.

• You cannot get out of the house, for you can get out of Christian profession only by apostasy; but you have to purge yourselves from vessels to dishonour, and to
  • "follow righteousness, faith, love, peace, with them that call on the Lord out of a pure heart".

• Most of us have had to leave associations in which perhaps we were born and brought up, to purge ourselves from vessels to dishonour and to find out another path, that is, to
  • "pursue righteousness, faith, love, peace, with those that call upon the Lord out of a pure heart".

• But then, if you have done that, you want guidance; and the only guidance which you have from God is the original order for the house of God.

• You cannot re-establish the house of God; it is going on to judgment; but you can understand the principles which were to be seen in the house of God, and fall back upon them for your guidance.

• We can see the true intercessory place in which the house of God, the saints, were set; we can see what was to characterise the men, and what was to be the adornment of the women, the prayer and the good works; and we can see, too, the oversight and the ministry which were provided there.

That is our path, beloved friends. One of the greatest privileges that I know of is that we can return to first principles.

• When I first came away from other associations, I remember being confronted with the idea that what you find in Scripture as to early days is impracticable now.
  • But what is of God and God's direction can never be impracticable.

• The Spirit is still here, and the point is to go back to what was from the outset; it is the only guidance you have.

I trust by the grace of God I have made the thought of the house somewhat plain. I think anyone who has followed me can conceive the idea of the house, as well as of the temple. Both are presented to us in Scripture.

• But alas! the house of God is going on to judgment. It will be left by all that is of God, and the heaviest judgments from God will fall upon that which has had the responsibility of being the house of God.

• Thank God we have been awakened to see it, and to purge ourselves; and may God give us grace that in lowliness of mind we may go on pursuing
  • "righteousness, faith, love, peace, with those that call upon the Lord out of a pure heart",

• guided by the true principles of the house of God.

• May God stir the men up to prayer; I am sure we need to be stirred up to it; and the women to care less about outward adornment, but that they may be adorned with good works. That is the adornment for God, and that is the true adornment in the presence of men.

Before speaking about the detail, which comes out in this chapter, I want to say a word about the relative places of John and Paul in regard to the church.

• John had no distinctive church ministry.

• Peter had, and Paul had: the commission to Peter was to feed and shepherd the lambs and sheep of Christ, and Peter was to pass off the scene; the Lord revealed to him by what death he would glorify God.

• Paul's commission is conveyed in what he says,
  • "I have espoused you to one husband, that I may present you as a chaste virgin to Christ".

• John laboured in testimony in common with the twelve; but had no distinctive mission – I lay stress upon the word 'distinctive' –
  • because when you come to the twelve foundations of the heavenly city the twelve apostles of the Lamb are all included there.

• In the beginning of the Revelation, what is revealed to John is the ruin and decay of what Paul had laboured to build, especially at Ephesus.

• You cannot study the Acts of the Apostles without seeing that Ephesus is the climax of Paul's work.

• When the seven churches of Asia are passed under review as representative, and the Lord reveals to John by them the state of the church, he begins with Ephesus, because the point of departure is seen there.

• What it means is this; the church had fallen away from the truth of its espousal; as to the state of the affections it had left its first love, it had left the point where Paul had placed it.

• But it was, so to say, Paul's church, built especially upon the foundation of his testimony.

Now what comes to pass is this, that John is shown what Paul never saw.

• You do not find in Paul's writings the idea of revival in the church here.

• In his second epistle to Timothy Paul gives instruction as to what one is to do when the church has become "a great house", that a man has to
  • purge himself from vessels to dishonour and to "pursue righteousness, faith, love, peace, with those that call upon the Lord out of a pure heart";

• but he does not give the idea at all of any revival of the truth of the church in souls.

• But in John, though the Lord shows to him the departure, the truth comes out in the latter part of the addresses to the seven churches of a certain degree of revival.

• It is that which made me read the address to the church in Philadelphia; because undoubtedly you have there a revival of the truth, not only as truth, but in the apprehension and practice of it.

• Philadelphia does not describe to us a company characterised by holding certain truths, but it stands representatively before the Lord in the truth of the church.

• It might be reduced to very narrow limits; it might be a very diminutive company; but the whole value of Philadelphia is that it stands in the truth of the church;
  • and the Lord speaks not of something peculiar to Philadelphia, but of what is proper to the church.

• The position of Philadelphia was this:
  • "Thou hast … kept my word, and hast not denied my name".

• That was characteristic. Then He says, speaking of those of the synagogue of Satan,
  • "I will make them to come and worship before thy feet, and to know that I have loved thee".

• I do not think that means Philadelphia simply, but states what is true of the church.
  • "Christ … loved the church". Then He says,

  • "Because thou hast kept the word of my patience

• – here again I think Philadelphia is looked upon as representative –
  • "I also will keep thee from the hour of temptation".

• The Lord is really speaking in spirit to the church.

• I decline altogether the idea of attaching any peculiar value to a particular company because that company holds something distinctive.

• The only value of any company in the present dispensation is that they return to what was from the outset; that is that they represent morally the church as before Christ.

• Then the Lord can speak to them; and I think that is the position of Philadelphia. It comprehends those who are morally in the truth of the church's position before Christ.

I would add that I have no doubt it is the special line of truth which is opened to us in John's writings that really brings about the position of Philadelphia.

• So that John does not set aside Paul, but comes in his own particular line to make effective the truth of Paul.

• For my conviction is that in the present day it is the special line of truth which John opens up as to
  • the revelation of the Father and the Son, and the gift of eternal life and the Holy Spirit, which brings souls into the truth of Philadelphia;

  • and when you have got there you have really returned to the point of departure, to the truth of the church.

If you read the addresses to the last three churches, you will find that neither Sardis nor Laodicea has got back to Christ; the Lord is distant in both of them;

• but in Philadelphia He is the holy and the true, and they keep His word and do not deny His name.

• It is of great importance to see how John's ministry substantiates Paul's.

• You have to remember that although John was the latest writer in Scripture, as is supposed, yet it was given to Paul to complete the word of God; so that you cannot have any further dispensation brought out beyond Paul.

• The Lord revealed to John the decay and ruin of the church of which Paul had laid the foundation;
  • but at the same time there is, as we have seen, at the close a certain measure of revival of the truth, which Paul did not foresee.

• The Lord showed to John the whole history of the church in a sense, under the description of "the things that are",
  • and made known the end of "the things that are" in order to make way for "the things that are about to be after these"; for the two cannot overlap.

• When "the things that are" have come to a close, then "the things that are about to be after these" come to pass.

• Then the twenty-four elders are seen in heaven, and the seven Spirits are before the throne; the church is no longer here, nor is the Spirit of God; and the things about to come to pass are the judgments which are premonitory to the coming of the Lord;
  • because John's great point is to bring Christ in glory into the scene from which He has been rejected. John claims the world for God.

But it was given of the Lord that as the revelation to Paul had placed the church in heaven,

• so John should see the church coming down from God out of heaven.

• That will take us to chapter 21, where he says,
  • "I saw a new heaven and a new earth: for the first heaven and the first earth were passed away; and there was no more sea.

    "And I John saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down from God out of heaven, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband.

    "And I heard a great voice out of heaven saying, Behold, the tabernacle of God is with men, and he will dwell with them, and they shall be his people, and God himself shall be with them, and be their God.

    "And God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes; and there shall be no more death, neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain: for the former things are passed away".

• These verses should be read in conjunction with the previous chapter, because they follow on quite in the line of it.

• John had been led on to see the final resurrection and judgment, every moral question settled; and then as a close he sees the holy city coming down from God out of heaven, and the tabernacle of God is with men.

• That is where we get the holy city connected with the eternal state; it is not a new subject, but what I may call the proper issue.

• As I understand it, the kingdom, what we commonly speak of as the millennium, is the means to an end.

• The kingdom is in view of the eternal state; after the repression of all evil, and the final dealing with it, the kingdom is delivered up, and God is all in all, and then it is that you get the holy city coming down.

• And the import of it is that "the tabernacle of God is with men, and he will dwell with them", and will be their God, and they shall be His people; former things are passed away, and there is no more death.

• All that state of things is at an end; all things are new, the tabernacle of God is not with Israel, but with men; there is no distinction between races.

• Those few verses are much more properly attached to the preceding chapter; I touch on them because they give the proper sequence.

• The truth that is revealed to the apostle John leads on to the eternal state, and what comes to pass there.

• What I have said proves this much, that John is shown the church in its outward aspect as the place of God's tabernacle among men.

• We get the same idea in Leviticus 16. On the day of atonement, beside the sin-offering for Aaron and his house, which was connected with approach to God,
  • the blood of the goat, the sin-offering of the people, was necessary, because the tabernacle of God remained among the children of Israel in spite of their uncleanness.

All that closes up in verse 6, and in verse 9 you come to a kind of supplementary detail:

• "There came unto me one of the seven angels which had the seven vials full of the seven last plagues, and talked with me, saying, Come hither, I will shew thee the bride, the Lamb's wife".

• In the beginning of chapter 17 it says,
  • "And there came one of the seven angels which had the seven vials, and talked with me, saying unto me, Come hither; I will shew unto thee the judgment of the great whore that sitteth upon many waters".

  • "So he carried me away in the spirit into the wilderness".

• I refer to that only to show the connection; it was one of the seven angels that had the seven last plagues that showed John the harlot, the great whore, the false apostate church,
  • and it is one of the same seven angels that talked with John, saying, "Come hither; I will shew thee the bride, the Lamb's wife".

• He was carried away into the wilderness to be shown the whore. Now he is not taken into the wilderness, but to "a great and high mountain".
  • That means that you must get very much above the earth if you are to understand anything at all about the bride, the Lamb's wife.

• You can understand the great whore in the wilderness; but you must, like John, get to a mountain great and high if you want to know anything about the bride, the Lamb's wife.

• But notice this, John does not see the bride, the Lamb's wife, in her relations to the bridegroom, but in the character of a city.

• It is the same city, I suppose, which had been spoken of previously in the chapter as
  • "a bride adorned for her husband";

• here it is the bride, the Lamb's wife.
  • "He shewed me that great city, the holy Jerusalem, descending out of heaven from God".

• The great whore could not rise above the wilderness; there was nothing heavenly about her; but the bride, the Lamb's wife, comes down from God out of heaven.

• She must have been taken there in the first instance, and this was the power of the ministry of Paul; John sees her coming from God out of heaven, having the glory of God.

• It is a wonderful result, and particularly to one like John, to whom the ruin of the church had been revealed, the decay of everything down here, all ending really in Thyatira and Laodicea.

I will very briefly notice the details which are given to us as distinctive of the heavenly city; though I do not attempt to interpret details or symbols, but only just to give three or four leading ideas in connection with them,

• for it is of the very deepest interest to us to see the features which distinguish the city as coming down from God out of heaven.

• The city is the heavenly metropolis, and the first point about her is that she has
  • "the glory of God: and her light was like unto a stone most precious, even like a jasper stone, clear as crystal;

    "and had a wall great and high, and had twelve gates, and at the gates twelve angels, and names written thereon, which are the names of the twelve tribes of the children of Israel".

    "And the wall of the city had twelve foundations, and in them the names of the twelve apostles of the Lamb".

• So far you get, I think, the marks of identification:
  1. the first is the glory of God, the expression of His infinite satisfaction,

  2. the second is the names of the twelve tribes of Israel, and

  3. the third is the twelve apostles of the Lamb.

• They are the links with what is past, and the marks of identification by which the city is known.

1. The first is the glory of God. Ever since sin came into the world, what has been in view has been the glory of God.

• What I understand by the glory of God is the complete and perfect satisfaction of the divine attributes in the accomplishment of God's counsels of grace

• The God of glory appeared to Abraham; there you get the first idea of counsel in the way of promise.

• Stephen saw the glory of God in the presence of Jesus.

• And in Paul there shone forth
  • "the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ".

• In the church is seen the complete and perfect satisfaction of the divine attributes in the accomplishment of God's counsels of grace.

• And this is what characterises the heavenly metropolis, "Jerusalem above". Her shining is like unto a stone most precious, and she is resplendent with the glory of God.

2. The second mark is the names of the twelve tribes of Israel. That conveys to me the thought that in the church you cannot ignore the twelve tribes of Israel;

• they have their place in the counsel of God, and salvation came out from them to the Gentiles. We have become partakers of their spiritual things.

  The twelve tribes are represented in the city, and a correspondence exists between them and the gates.

3. Then the third mark is that, looked at in the aspect in which it is here presented, as the city, the church is founded on the work of the twelve apostles; in the foundations are the names of the twelve apostles of the Lamb.

• You do not get any allusion here to Paul, for the reason that the church is not presented in its relations Christward, but
  • in its outward aspect, as the heavenly city, where the glory of God is and presents itself to men.

• The names of the twelve apostles of the Lamb complete the three marks of identification.

The next point is the measure of the city:

• "And the city lieth four-square, and the length is as large as the breadth: and he measured the city with the reed, twelve thousand furlongs.

  "The length and the breadth and the height of it are equal.

  "And he measured the wall thereof, an hundred and forty and four cubits, according to the measure of a man, that is, of the angel".

• That is the measure of it. It has often been pointed out that it is a cube, the breadth, and the length and the height of it are equal; it is all measured, all taken into account.

• You get the idea of measuring also in chapter 11, the temple of God, and the worshippers, and the altar, were to be measured.
  • What does the measuring mean?

• I believe it is the demonstration that every demand of divine righteousness is answered; it is really the fulfilment and display of what is spoken of in 2 Corinthians 5:
  • "He hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him".

• In the church all is equal and exact; there is no adjustment wanted; the length and breadth and height of it are all equal.

• There are two ways in which righteousness is presented to us in Scripture; one as the ground of our justification as here upon earth,
  • and the other in the ministry of reconciliation that, as the result of Christ having been made sin for us, we have boldness to enter into the holiest.

• Here you get the whole thing completed and displayed; that is the measure of the city.

Now we come to the next point, the preciousness of what is there.

• "And the building of the wall of it was of jasper: and the city was pure gold, like unto clear glass. And the foundations of the wall of the city were garnished with all manner of precious stones"
  • – I need not enumerate them –

  "And the twelve gates were twelve pearls; every several gate was of one pearl: and the street of the city was pure gold, as it were transparent glass".

• The idea which that conveys to me is that it is the precious result of the formative work of God individually in the saints.

• The light is refracted in the precious stones. No precious stone gives light, but refracts light, it throws off light.
  • And that is the preciousness of the church in that sense.

• But then each is the fruit and result of the work of the lapidary, everything that would obstruct light has been removed.

• The idea of preciousness in each individual part is carried on to the gates. The foundation was the beginning, and the gates the completion.

• "Every several gate" is of one pearl; each was unique of its kind. It all conveys, I think, the idea of the work of the Spirit of God in the saints;
  • the practical result of which is that every saint is bright in the light which comes from Christ.

• That is what ought to be here, every one of us should reflect some trait of the perfectness of Christ. That is the preciousness.

Now I pass on to the fourth point, to what I may call the characteristics of the city. It says,

• "And I saw no temple therein: for the Lord God Almighty and the Lamb are the temple of it.

  "And the city had no need of the sun, neither of the moon, to shine in it: for the glory of God did lighten it, and the Lamb is the light thereof.

  "And the nations of them which are saved shall walk in the light of it: and the kings of the earth do bring their glory and honour into it.

  "And the gates of it shall not be shut at all by day: for there shall be no night there. And they shall bring the glory and honour of the nations into it.

  "And there shall in no wise enter into it any thing that defileth, neither whatsoever worketh abomination, or maketh a lie; but they which are written in the Lamb's book of life".

• These are the distinctive marks.

1. The first is, there is no temple. I doubt if there ever was before a city without a temple,

• but the heavenly city has no temple, because the city itself is really the church,

• and is composed entirely of living stones, profession has no place; and hence there is no temple –
  • "the Lord God Almighty and the Lamb are the temple of it".

• You could not have a temple in the heavenly city, where God dwells and is approached without a veil, a temple would be out of place.

• You can have and do have a temple here upon earth, for in the present dispensation, saints, living stones, are the temple in the midst of profession, and the city is not yet.

• In heaven there is no temple. Those who constitute the city were the temple down here.
  • That is the first characteristic.

2. The second is, that there is no need of natural light; they have no need of the sun nor of the moon; the glory of God lightens it, and the Lamb is the light thereof.

• It is enlightened by what is displayed of God in what God has secured for Himself for His own glory, for the display of His own attributes; and all made known in the Lamb; it is that which is the light of the temple, and they do not need natural light.

• A man who is a great natural light is no good as such in the temple of God. The Corinthians were looking for natural light, cultivated men, men of parts.

• And that is where Christendom is at the present time; but what is suited for the temple is the spiritual man; and as to the city, the glory of God lightens it, and the Lamb is the lamp thereof, the lamp-bearer.

• What they are enlightened by in the heavenly city is all the good of God; divine attributes in their display and satisfaction, all shine out there.
  • That is the second great characteristic.

3. The third is, that the nations get the good of it. Just as in regard to the temple the Lord could say,

• "My house shall be called a house of prayer for all the nations",

• that is, the nations were to get the good of what was established in Israel, so when you come to the heavenly city, the nations are to walk in the light of it;
  • that is, all the light which comes out in the church is good for the nations.

• The revelation of God and of what God is, which is centred in the church, holds good in blessing for the nations down here; and how it is effectual is in the sense, that if God could make known in the church
  • "the exceeding riches of his grace in his kindness towards us through Christ Jesus",

• how good God must be! That will hold good for the nations here upon earth, they will walk in the light of the city.

4. And then there is one more point, the gates of it are not shut. The reason is that there is no night there;

• the very power of good and light excludes the entrance of anything that is of darkness;

• there is the opposite element to darkness, and when this is so then no darkness gains entrance, there is no night there.
  • That is the last characteristic of the heavenly city.

I have touched upon four:

1. the first is, there is no temple in that blessed scene, there is nothing into which God retreats.

2. Then they have no need of natural light, neither sun nor moon, the greatest natural light is all out of place there.

3. Then it is good for the nations; the nations walk in the light of it.

4. Finally, there is no night there, and therefore the gates are not shut by day; evil and darkness are kept out by the power of good.

I do not doubt, beloved friends, that all these characteristics ought to be seen in the church on earth;

• that what will come out in the heavenly city ought in principle to have marked the temple of God down here.

• The church ought to have known its own privilege,

1. that Jew and Gentile by one Spirit had access to the Father; there was no temple in that sense;

2. and that the greatest natural lights were entirely out of place where the Spirit of God was; that what was wanted was the spiritual man.

3. Then again, the nations ought to have got the good, because the church was to be in the place of supplication and prayer and intercession and giving of thanks for all men.

4. Then again, evil ought to have been excluded by the very power of the good and light in the temple; there should not have been any night there.
   • Night and darkness came in by the work of the enemy, affinity existed, and thus it was that things became corrupted.

It is wonderful that God has been pleased to show to us not only what the temple will be –

• "all the building fitly framed together groweth unto an holy temple in the Lord"

• – but how the church will come out in its public, outward aspect as the city, and all the features and characteristics which will mark it when it does come down from God out of heaven.

• It is worthy the name of a great city, the true metropolis. May God give us grace that faith may lay hold of it. I do not think you can take in the truth of it without its having some present effect upon you.

• The features which will come out perfectly then, ought to mark those who, through grace, have really returned to the first principles of the church.

• It is a great thing that God should have brought us back to it; and my conviction is this, that
  • it is really the truth which God has been pleased to give us in a special way through John, that has brought us back in some little degree

  • to the apprehension of what God gave originally through Paul, the truth of the church in its relations to Christ.

• And depend upon it, the more we enter into the truth of the church's place in relation to Christ,
  • the more we shall enjoy the thought of the wonderful display which God is going to make in the heavenly city.

• May God give us to understand it spiritually.

• What is made known to us is but the completion of what exists;
  • I could not say it is the completion of the word of God, because the revelation of the church as the body is that;

• but it is the completion in glory of that which is formed here.