Purification and Life
Ministry by G. R. Cowell
– Memorials: Volume 9

The above is important to understand the historical setting of this challenging and edifying ministry.

G.A R.

As in all matters he touches, John has what is inward primarily in his mind. It is a question of inward purification.

• Outward purification must flow, if it is to be acceptable, from inward purification.

• Paul, of course, would have both in mind, but he stresses outward purification; in 2 Corinthians 6: 17 he quotes the injunction
  • “Wherefore come out from the midst of them, and be separated, saith the Lord, and touch not what is unclean”, because purification in its outward aspect involves separation,

  • but follows that by saying “Having therefore these promises, beloved, let us purify ourselves from every pollution of flesh and spirit, perfecting holiness in God’s fear”, 2 Corinthians 7: 1.

• Undoubtedly in that injunction he is including, not only the outward purification which necessitates separation, but what is inward.

• Similarly, in 2 Timothy 2: 21 he speaks of purification and separation,
  • “If therefore one shall have purified himself from these”, (that is from vessels to dishonour) “in separating himself from them, he shall be a vessel to honour, sanctified, serviceable to the Master”.

• We cannot think of Paul having anything in mind other than that those who separate themselves do it as a result of what is inward.

We have to take warning in that respect, from the remnant who returned from Babylon.

• They left Babylon and returned to the truth of the house and of the city, but, while there were those who maintained an outward separation, the inward thing lapsed.

• And so the bitterest enemies of the Lord in this gospel were those who were maintaining an outward separation – the Pharisees – but their inward parts were full of plunder and wickedness.

We have to face this matter, because we have come out; we are positionally in purification through separation;

• but then we have to face the question as to whether our purification has begun from within, especially those of us who have been brought up in the meeting.

• If things are not worked out within, our separation becomes something which is very obnoxious, like the unclean beasts with the cloven hoof who did not chew the cud; there was nothing inward.

• So I think we can see the great importance, from this standpoint, of the gospel of John, because, if we take heed to it, we shall become purified persons inwardly,
  • and a person purified inwardly could not be other than so outwardly; but the great thing is to get the inward matter right.

So the gospel commences with this great presentation of the Person of Christ, for two reasons;

• first that we should be purified from every Philistine intrusion and speculation about His Person, and from every wrong thought of God;

• and secondly, the presentation is so great that if we really apprehend it, Christ will eclipse all others for us and we shall be purified as to our Object and motive.

The first chapter thus stands out as very important in that respect, bringing in a most purifying presentation of the Person of Christ.

• Later in the chapter we get the marvellous scope of His work, taking away the sin of the world, and then the present aspect of His work, baptising with the Holy Spirit.

• At the close we see persons coming to Him, the gathering Centre, and His glories in dominion engage the heart. So this is a wonderful chapter.

We might consider first the glory of His Person, and the glory of His Person, in this gospel, links with “The Name” of the Old Testament.

• There are names and titles in the Old Testament, but the name of the only true God was “I am that I am”.

• The creature’s answer to that is “Jah”, the One who is, and in revelation, “Jehovah”;

• but those three cognate words, “I am”, “Jah”, and “Jehovah”, constituted the name of God as disclosed in the Old Testament, and this gospel links on with that.

The first gospel, Matthew, brings in the greatest of titles, “El”, “Emmanuel … ‘God with us’”, Matthew 1: 23,

• and closes by telling us who that God is, what His name is as known now, “the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit”, Matthew 28: 19.

• But this gospel does not go back to a title in that sense, nor, in the first three verses, to Christ as the subject of prophecy; it goes back to the fact that the Person who came is the “I AM”.

J.Hr. Does it help to see that this Person who is so glorious was found in the midst of all the corruption that is in the world, and yet maintained every feature that was right in relation to God?

G.R.C. Is not that involved in the word “In him was life, and the life was the light of men”. J.N.D. says:

P.H.H. Is your word about the “I am” emphasised in chapter 8, where the Lord says, “unless ye shall believe that I am [he], ye shall die in your sins”, verse 24,

• and then in verse 28, “When ye shall have lifted up the Son of man, then ye shall know that I am [he], and that I do nothing of myself, but as the Father has taught me I speak these things”.

• Is it striking that He brings out the name in speaking to the Jews thus?

G.R.C. Yes, and He immediately brings out the perfection of His dependent manhood. One such as He, who is “I am”, could yet say that “the Father has taught me”.

P.H.H. I was wondering about that very thing, His dependent manhood, in the very same verse as He mentions His own name, as God.

G.R.C. Scripture seems to delight to put His deity and manhood together. They are so often put in juxtaposition,

• “When ye shall have lifted up the Son of man, then ye shall know that I am”,

• but then He goes on “I do nothing of myself, but as the Father has taught me I speak these things”.

P.L. The expression “In him was life”, chapter 1: 4, bears of course on His deity; but in chapter 5 He speaks of the Father having given Him to have life in Himself.

• Would that bear on His perfect dependence, ever preserved as the Sent One, in the midst of corruption and death?

G.R.C. Indeed it would.

P.B. You spoke earlier of purification and life. This begins with life. Could you say how it bears on your remark?

G.R.C. “In him was life”. We cannot limit that expression. It seems a kind of absolute statement which no doubt involves the truth of His Person.

• But then, it was what was manifested here; such an One here manifested life in perfection in manhood.

• “That eternal life”, John says in the epistle, “which was with the Father, and has been manifested to us”, 1 John 1: 2. “And the life was the light of men”.

• All the springs of His life were in God. He did nothing but what He saw the Father doing, He did not speak except words given to Him by the Father.

• There was manifest here on earth a Man whose springs were all in God, and were therefore absolutely pure, He was altogether what He said; He did not seek His own glory, but the glory of the One who sent Him. Life was seen in perfection in Him.

• As regards ourselves, apart from purification there cannot be life in relation to God. Life in the proper sense of the word cannot subsist apart from purification.

• I am referring to us now. In Christ life was manifest in all its purity, and it was light on all around, it was the light of men.

A.J.G. Does that mean that in thus manifesting that life, God had in mind that men should be brought into it?

G.R.C. That is what I was thinking. The life of Jesus here, while it exposed man, was a manifestation that it was God’s mind for men to be in a life like that, in so far as the creature can be.

• And is not that where purification from our point of view becomes essential?

A.J.G. Yes, I am sure it is.

E.J.H. In chapter 20: 31, you get the words “that ye may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that believing ye might have life in his name”.

G.R.C. That is the great objective. Believing “that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God” is really believing on Him as the theme of prophetic testimony. That is what comes in later in chapter 1.

G.R.D. Does the darkness not apprehending the light mean that there is some moral cause for that, hence the need of purification to follow if the light is to be apprehended?

G.R.C. Yes. And I suppose we have to take account of the fact recorded in Genesis 1 that darkness existed before man.

• The darkness is spoken of here, it is an awful thing, “the darkness apprehended it not”.

• No doubt it is physical darkness that is actually referred to in Genesis 1, but nevertheless, one would think that it is to bring home to us the spiritual darkness, “darkness was on the face of the deep”.

• Darkness had come into the universe before man was made. But man having been created, and set up in innocence, the darkness engulfed man, as I would understand.

P.L. Would the incapacity of man to respond, bear on the moral darkness that marks him according to verse  5,

• and then the religious darkness in the end of verse 26, “In the midst of you stands, whom ye do not know”,

• and then the natural darkness of one outwardly related to the Lord, “I knew him not”, verse 31?

G.R.C. That is very helpful. I think we need to take account of those features of darkness, influences which will hold us in the darkness if we allow them, moral darkness, religious darkness, and the darkness of nature.

F.H. In Matthew it says Jesus “went and dwelt at Capernaum”, and “the people sitting in darkness has seen a great light”, chapter 4: 13-16. Has that any bearing on this – Light manifested?

G.R.C. It has. It speaks there of light springing up. But there is the darkness itself, “the darkness” is an awful thing,

• but the light has now come. “And the light appears in darkness, and the darkness apprehended it not”. But the light had come for men.

• Angelic beings are involved in the darkness, there are those called “the lords of this darkness”, but the light was not for them.

–.I. “Blessed are the pure in heart for they shall see God”, Matthew 5: 8.

J.O.T.D. Would there be some reason for the use of the present tense in verse 5, “And the light appears in darkness”?

• Has that some reference to what has come out in continuity, not only in Christ in the days of blood and flesh, but what has continued now in the Spirit’s day?

G.R.C. It may be so. But it is for men; God has in mind extricating men; not angels but men; men who have become engulfed in the darkness.

• So that this refers to Jesus in manhood, “the life was the light of men”, but then, if men were to apprehend it, purification was essential.

L.A.C. Is there a link in Ezekiel’s prophecy with what we have here? The question is asked in chapter 8: 12 “Hast thou seen, son of man, what the elders of the house of Israel do in the dark”,

• and in chapter 43: 2 it says “And behold, the glory of the God of Israel came from the way of the east; and his voice was like the voice of many waters; and the earth was lit up with his glory”.

• I wondered whether what we have here is the glory of the God of Israel coming in.

G.R.C. Quite so. And I think before we proceed farther we ought to take account of the first three verses,

• because they are a very emphatic assertion by the Spirit of God that Jesus is “I am”.

• We have His own assertion of it in chapter 8: 58, but the Spirit’s assertion that Jesus is “I am” is in the first three verses of the gospel.

• It says “In the beginning was the Word”; that is, He had no beginning, in the beginning He was; “and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God”.

• There is certain light in that as to the Godhead, that is, the distinction of the Persons, “He was in the beginning with God”.

• But then it says “All things received being through him, and without him not one thing received being which has received being”.

• The idea of the name “I am” is that God alone is self-existent, He is the great self-existent One, and all other existences are derived; and that is what is predicated of Christ here.
  • He ever was, He never began to be, but all things began to be (that is the literal word here) through him.

• That is the idea of the “I am”. He alone has existence in Himself. Every other existence, everything else, began to be, and began to be through Him. So that Jesus is presented in His glory, as “I am that I am”.

A.T.D. Would the thought of “the Word” go as far as God expressed, the unfolding of God?

G.R.C. I think it does. It involves the expression of all that is in God’s mind. The word ‘Logos’ involves what is in the mind. The whole mind of God is in expression in Jesus.

A.H.G. Did you say that the apprehension of Jesus in this way was the real beginning of inward purification?

G.R.C. Yes. For one thing it purifies our minds from all the speculations of the natural mind as to Jesus;

• all such speculations come to an end if we accept these first three verses, that Jesus is “I am”.

• Some Ephesians were being led away by speculations, according to 1 Timothy 1: 4 – interminable genealogies. But this goes back beyond even the line of prophetic testimony.

• Prophetic testimony declares that the coming One would be the Christ, the Son of God. Psalm 2. It was this prophetic testimony that Nathanael accepted.

• But verses 1-3 present to us the greatness of the Person who came to fulfil all prophetic testimony.

P.L. So that you have self-existence – “In the beginning was the Word”; and “the Word was with God” – His own eternal personality in the Godhead; and “the Word was God” – absolute Deity. It excludes everything that could emanate from man.

J.H. The reception inwardly of the glory of this Person, the “I am”, would result in the exclusion of every opposing element inwardly; the “I am” cherished in our affections.

–.I. Did not the apostle Paul bring this before the Colossians to save them from being carried away?

G.R.C. He brings a very powerful testimony to the deity of Christ before the Colossians.

• And yet, in a way, this presentation by John is unique, as setting out, without any question, that Jesus is “I am”, the great self-existent One, through whom everything began to be.

• That is the One we are in the presence of; and it would lead to prostration before Him.

• Then in verse 14 it says “The Word became flesh”, that is, it is viewed as His own action, “the Word became [or began to be] flesh”.

A.P.B. I would like to ask as to the only two things that God is said to be – light, and love – whether there is a sense in which we have to understand the purity of God as light before we can really enter fully into the blessedness of His love?

G.R.C. I think that is right. So that light is the thing that first comes.

A.P.B. Yes. And the light has to do with purity, has it not?

G.R.C. It has. Light makes everything manifest.

P.H.H. Is it remarkable that the Person of Christ appears quite extensively in the opening verses, before there is anything said about ministry?

• I am connecting the ministry with John, “There was a man sent from God”, and it says of him in verse 8, “He was not the light, but that he might witness concerning the light”.

• Does that put in right perspective for us, first the Person of Christ, and then any ministry, even the most powerful, about Him subsequently?

G.R.C. I thought that. Does not John come before us in this chapter as what we might call a purified servant? The glory of Christ was so filling his vision.

• When Jews from Jerusalem, and priests and Levites came, and said, “Thou, who art thou?”, he had an opportunity to eulogise himself, but “he acknowledged and denied not, and acknowledged” – it is very strong language – “I am not the Christ.

• “And they asked him, What then? Art thou Elias? And he says, I am not. Art thou the prophet? And he answered, No. They said therefore to him, Who art thou? that we may give an answer to those who sent us. What sayest thou of thyself? He said, I am the voice of one crying in the wilderness”.

• He is only a voice to draw attention to the glorious Person who was standing in their midst, and they knew Him not.

• And then further he says, “the thong of whose sandal I am not worthy to unloose”. Surely that is the language of a true servant. He was not worthy even to be a slave, “the thong of whose sandal I am not worthy to unloose”.

P.H.H. I was thinking of that and wondering whether as a practical experience it would not help us to get things in right order in these days;

• thinking both of the privileged persons whom we know, who have served us, and also of Christendom being carried away by false voices, and persuasive speech; whereas the Person and the theme to hold us is the Word.

P.L. So that John the baptist’s credentials as a servant, in purification, in the light, are established against the pretensions of the Pharisees;

• and then he is active contemplatively and ministerially in love in his appreciation of this glorious Person. Is that the order?

G.R.C. I thought so. It says that these persons were sent from among the Pharisees, they were sent from those who were in an outward position of separation, but there was no inward purification.

E.J.H. Whereas “a man sent from God” would be a purified vessel to bear testimony to such a glorious Person, in contrast to those who were sent from the Pharisees.

G.R.C. Quite so. “A man sent from God” would have an appreciation of this glorious Person.

• For us it would mean that we frequent the holiest, we are sent from God in that sense; we are often in His presence.

A.H.G. Would this purification then involve the removal of ourselves from our sight?

G.R.C. I think that is a great point in purification, the removal of ourselves from our own sight. And so John says, I am a voice. He does not even claim to be a prophet,

• he says “I am the voice of one crying in the wilderness, Make straight the path of the Lord”, he is directing to the Lord, “as said Esaias the prophet”.

• And Esaias was another man who knew how to keep himself out of sight; like the Seraphim, who covered their faces and their feet, in the presence of the glory.

P.B. “These things said Esaias because he saw his glory”, John 12: 41.

J.A.P. Is the light purely in relation to men, “the life was the light of men”?

G.R.C. That is how I understand it. It is not the light of angels, nor even of Israel only; but “the life was the light of men”. So that the whole setting of this is outside of any restrictions.

• It is not going back to the promises to Israel, it does not even begin with any reference to what happened in the garden of Eden;

• it goes back to “In the beginning was the Word”, introducing us to the Person who came. So that we must have our minds purified from every human speculation about Him.

P.L. And is the final issue of this, the tabernacle of God being with men, that order of being?

G.R.C. It is.

Ques. Would this voice draw attention to “the Word”?

G.R.C. The great thing is that we should take account of the Word, “the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us”.

• And so you get the idea there of a purified circle, “the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us”; the previous verse indicates who the ‘us’ were –
  • “but to as many as received him, to them gave he the right to be the children of God, to those that believe on his name; who have been born, not of blood, nor of flesh’s will, nor of man’s will, but of God”.

• That is a very sweeping verse, it cuts out everything that brings in impurity. They “have been born not of blood, nor of flesh’s will, nor of man’s will, but of God”.

R.C. Have we therefore the great thought of purity, not only in regard to the Person Himself, the Word; but now in regard to those who are the subject of the work of God?

G.R.C. I thought so. This verse does not give us the moral working out of it in exercise of soul; but it presents it from the Divine side.

• They receive Him, and therefore are given the right to be the children of God, but they have been born, not of blood, nor of flesh’s will, nor of man’s will, but of God; and it is in a circle like that the Word dwells.

• “The Word became flesh, and dwelt among us”, so that we have a circle where He is appreciated as the Word.

A.P.B. Is that the “wholly right seed”, the pure seed, in contrast to the profession? Is not that what we need in ourselves?

G.R.C. Quite so. So that we should be exercised to be true to our birth, and to judge everything inconsistent with our birth.

A.T.B. Would you say a word as to “There was a man sent from God, his name John”. His birth was contrary to the ordinary course of nature, I suppose, that is referred to; and yet those you are speaking of are of a greater order than John, are they not?

G.R.C. He had a remarkable birth, and he was filled with the Holy Spirit from the womb; and it says here “he was sent from God”, freed from other influences, “sent from God”; but then as you say, those who are born of God, according to verse 13, have a greater place that John the baptist.

P.H.H. What is involved in the expression in verse 12, “but to as many as received him”? Am I right in thinking that it involves receiving the One in whom the whole declaration of God is?

G.R.C. I would think that. Then it says “those that believe on his name”. That would bring us to this point of the declaration of God.

• We have the greatness of the Person of Christ, and then His greatness as the Declarer of God, He shares with no one, in that.

P.H.H. I was thinking that sometimes, “as many as received him” might be taken up in a gospel setting, as receiving Him as Saviour, on the line of relief, forgiveness of sins; blessed as that is, this is greater, is it not?

G.R.C. And is it not a fact, specially at the end of the dispensation, that for persons to come into blessing, it involves receiving Him in the light of the greatness of His Person?

• I was thinking of your remarks as to John 8, He said to the Pharisees, “unless ye shall believe that I am [he], ye shall die in your sins”.

• Is not that a special feature of these days, that for persons to come into the blessing that is available at the close, it is essential that they should receive the Lord as appreciating the greatness of His Person as “I am”? It is really the test of every one.

L.G.B. Do we need to be maintained in the spirit of receptiveness?

G.R.C. We do. In the early days of the dispensation, before John wrote, numbers of heresies had come in,

• speculations as to the Person of Christ; and they have been revived in the last hundred and twenty years.

• With the revival of the truth, Satan has revived the heresies under modern names; and the feature common to them is this, that they deny that Jesus is “I am”. If you face them with the deity of Christ, they are exposed.

• So that it is a very testing question at the present time, as to all that is around us, as to whether persons believe that Jesus is “I am”.

• Have they received Him according to this setting forth of His Person, in the gospel of John? That is the test to people today.

• If they receive Him like that, it means that their minds, to begin with, are purified from all Philistine ideas. They have a purified start.

A.W.G.T. Even in the creed that is used very widely in the Christian profession, Christ is said to have been begotten in the past eternity. Is that not inimical to what you are saying as to His being “I am”?

G.R.C. It is. And then, because He is “I am”, He is competent in manhood to declare God. It gives Him, of course, competency for everything.

• If He comes for instance, on the line of prophecy, He comes as Son of God, King of Israel, Son of man;

• but His competency to fill out every position of which there is a prophetic testimony is based on who He is.

• But then the greatest thing, I suppose, of all, is that He has declared God.

• And so, if we look at verse 18 the first phrase, “No one has seen God at any time” would link back with verse 1, “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God”.

D.B. Is it significant that in chapter 8 where we have the woman taken in adultery, and the scribes and the Pharisees, it is to the latter that the Lord says “I am the light of the world; he that followeth me shall not walk in darkness, but shall have the light of life.”?

G.R.C. I think it is striking, because, as we were saying, the Pharisees were those in outward separation, but inwardly they were corrupt, and therefore in darkness, walking in darkness.

• But this verse, “No one has seen God at any time” seems to be an absolute statement; I mean, it would refer even to the Lord Himself, as in deity.

• If we take verse 1 by itself, the Word was there with God, and the Word was God; but no one has seen God at any time.

A.J.G. You mean that He Himself had never been seen until He became man.

G.R.C. And as to Deity, He never will be seen. Is that right?

A.J.G. “No one knows the Son” it says in Matthew 11: 27.

G.R.C. It is the inscrutability of Deity as such. We have to cherish the Deity of Christ in our souls,

• and that He is included in the expression in 1 Timothy 6: 16, “dwelling in unapproachable light; whom no man has seen, nor is able to see”. As to the glory of His Person, He is a Person of the Godhead.

J.Hr. Would you clarify for us, please, an expression that is current among us, as to the Persons of the Godhead, that ‘They have Their part in Deity’.

G.R.C. We get expressions amongst us which need to be tested by scripture.

• We tend to get dogmas, certain phrases which sound well when you first hear them, and tend to carry a force with us as though they were scripture.

• But I think we have continually to go back to scripture to test expressions that are current.

E.J.H. And if we think according to scripture we shall speak according to scripture.

G.R.C. Yes. But then it goes on to say here, in the verse we are on, verse 18, “the only-begotten Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared [him]”.

• So that we have the glory of Christ’s Person, and then the glory that belongs to Him as the One who has declared God.

• He has become flesh, and He is now known as the only-begotten Son who is in the bosom of the Father, and, as in that place, the place of the sweetest affections, He has become the Declarer of God.

P.H.H. That is not in His Deity, is it? That is in His manhood. While we could say that His Person never changes, yet the condition which He has taken up is something new.

G.R.C. Quite so. He is unchanging in His Person.

P.H.H. What would you say about 1 Timothy 3: 16 “God has been manifested in flesh, has been justified in the Spirit, has appeared to angels”, or “has been seen of angels”?

• I am linking on with what this word says, “No one has seen God at any time”, and in Timothy it says “God has appeared to angels”, or “has been seen of angels”.

• Does that also point to His manhood, God has been manifested in flesh?

G.R.C. Quite so. God has been manifested, it is not only that Christ Himself is God, but He manifested the nature and character of God.

C.W.O’L.M. Would you say a word please in this connection as to the statement in Matthew 5: 8, “Blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see God”?

G.R.C. I think we have to take account of abstract Deity. That is what I think is meant by, “No one has seen God at any time”.

• In the abstract conditions and relations of Deity, He is beyond the apprehension of the creature, as Paul says, “dwelling in unapproachable light”, 1 Timothy 6: 16.

• We know it is light, but it is unapproachable. But then, “the only-begotten Son who is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared [him]”, brings in what we call the economy.

A.J.G. And he is “image of the invisible God”, Colossians 1: 15.

A.P.B. Is it in your mind that we need to let this full light really penetrate into our hearts, because, if there is darkness still there, it is through lack of the full apprehension of the declaration of God as made known in this Person who is the “I am”?

G.R.C. That is just what I have in mind. And we need to cherish Him in our affections as the One who has declared Him.

• No one else was competent. No one but One who is Himself “I am” was competent to declare God. He has declared Him.

Ques. And is the declaration just what God has been pleased to let creatures know?

G.R.C. It includes that God is known in His nature and character.

• What I mean by that is, God coming out as He has done in this economy of grace, means that we know God in nature and character as He always was and as He always will be. So that we can speak of what is “from eternity” as well as “to eternity”.

• His nature, that is love, and His character, are now in radiant display in Jesus.

• It is not that God has changed in His character. It is what He always was and always will be; He is the unchanging God. The title “the Same” emphasises that.

• But then, what He is, in His nature and character, was not known; certain light as to it was given in Old Testament times,

• but now, Jesus, the “I am”, has come into this relation, the only-begotten Son in the bosom of the Father, and there is a full display of what God is in His nature and His character.

P.L. So that God has become His own testimony.

G.R.C. Yes. So that when we say that we are limited to the economy for our knowledge of God – and it is in the economy that God is fully known –

• it does not mean that we cannot carry back what we learn of Him thus, in the sense of what He is in His nature.

A.J.G. It is because He is what He is, and always has been, that He has devised the economy so that He might make it known to man.

G.R.C. That is what I thought.

–.G. Is what you say supported by the other reference to “No one has seen God at any time” in 1 John 4: 12? John links it with love, and the indwelling of the Spirit.

G.R.C. It goes on to say, “If we love one another, God abides in us, and His love is perfected in us”. So that God in His nature is to shine out in the saints.

J.W.S. Job says “but now mine eye seeth thee” chapter 42: 5.

G.R.C. Scripture makes it quite clear that we do see God in the sense in which you are speaking.

• The pure in heart see God. But it is God in the way He has manifested Himself. We see God expressed in a Man, the Son.

• All that God is, all that can be known of God, is shining out in a Man; the nature and character of God is shining in the face of Jesus.

• He has been into death, and is now glorified that we might be brought unto the presence of that radiant outshining of God, and be at home in it.

W.B.H. Is your point that as that is apprehended by us, and appreciated by us, it would promote this matter of purification.

G.R.C. It would, particularly as giving Christ the place that He should have before our vision; who He is in His Person, and what He has done in declaring God.

• He has manifested God in His nature and character, and not only so but He has brought out all that can be known of the Father, and of Himself, the Son, and of the Holy Spirit,

• and of the activities and the relationships which are proper to this great economy. There is the full declaration.

A.J.G. Would you say that He has also brought in, and presents in Himself, the perfect answer to it in Man? Otherwise, the light of God without a perfect answer to it would leave us disappointed, so to speak, and incomplete.

G.R.C. Is it not wonderful that there is a full answer in the only-begotten Son who is in the bosom of the Father?

J.O.T.D. Does this statement “full of grace and truth” imply that there is to be also an adequate answer in the saints, in whom, through this service and the ministration of grace and truth, the darkness has been dispelled?

G.R.C. If we apprehend Jesus in this way, I think it will bring us into line with John the baptist. We shall count it a privilege just to be a voice to draw attention to Him; and we shall regard ourselves as unworthy even to unloose the thong of His sandals.

A.P.A. Will you say a word as to the expression “only-begotten”?

G.R.C. Does it not give Him His unique place?

A.P.A. Yes. I was thinking of the word “begotten”.

G.R.C. It links with Psalm 2: 7, “Thou art my Son; I this day have begotten thee”. But “the only-begotten” brings in a peculiarly affectionate touch.

J.Hgs. Does the reference to contemplation indicate that it is a matter which is really learned in the presence of God?

G.R.C. Contemplation is an important word; we need more time in the presence of God to contemplate this glorious Person in whom God is shining forth.

A.J.G. It is a striking thing that John uses it in the gospel which presents Him as the Word in whom God is fully presented to us,

• but He also uses it in the epistle which presents Him as the word of life, in whom there is the perfect answer to the outshining of God;

• as though contemplation is to mark us in our appreciation of Christ in both lights.

L.L. John the baptist contemplated Jesus and seemed to get a fresh impression the next day – “On the morrow”, as if the contemplation of the glory of the Person would give us something to consider every day.

G.R.C. Quite so. The first thing he says in verse 29 is “Behold the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world”. This brings out the scope of his work and service, or one of the great features of it.

• He has laid the foundation in His sacrifice, but, He is about to take away the sin of the world publicly.

• It is a wonderful thing to contemplate One who can do that, and who, at all cost to Himself, has laid the foundation for it in sacrifice.

P.L. And on His way to take sin out of the world, would He take sin out of our hearts?

G.R.C. He would. He baptises with the Holy Spirit. He is the One who takes away the sin of the world

• – not the sins of the world – it is not a question here of people being freed from their sins, but the sin of the world.

• He is going to remove from the world the whole principle which alienates the world from God.

A.P.B. Is that unbelief?

G.R.C. It is unbelief, but it is really man as his own centre. The Lord Jesus is going to take away the idea of man being the centre, and make God the Centre.

A.P.B. Is not that what we ourselves need so very much, in order to be purified?

G.R.C. That is just what I think. He is going to take away the sin of the world,

• but at the present time, it is a question of taking away that principle in us, so that sin should not dominate us.

• Sin is self-centredness, and we can be self-centred, as we know, even in service.

• The presentation of Christ in the greatness of His own Person, and as the Declarer of God – bringing God in, the full outshining of God, the full light of the economy – is to make God the Centre for us.

• That is real purification, when God becomes the Centre of the heart. Then the principle of sin is overthrown.

G.W.B. In the epistle of John it says the darkness is passing. Is that what is going on in the saints now?

G.R.C. And so John says here, after referring to how he knew the Lord, “he it is who baptises with the Holy Spirit”.

• The full taking away of the sin of the world is future, but He is baptising with the Holy Spirit, and that is one of the greatest conceivable things,
  • because it is through the baptising of the Holy Spirit that the greatest vessel that Divine purpose has conceived has been brought into existence.

  • Baptising with the Holy Spirit relates to the church period.

• Thus we have presented a Person, coming from His place in Deity into manhood, without specific reference to Israel, or to promises, but coming forth and declaring God, bringing the full light of God to man;
  • but first of all with a view to securing the body, that which was the subject of eternal purpose.

• And so, while the scope of His service is to the world – not simply to Israel, as on the line of promise – yet as coming forth from eternity,
  • His first concern, if one might use that expression, is to secure that vessel which is the subject of eternal purpose.

• “He it is who baptises with the Holy Spirit”. So, while the word assembly is not mentioned in John, the assembly is really the first thing. It is ever first with God.

A.J.G. So that there is a full answer to God as thus declared in a creature vessel. Not simply a perfect answer in Christ, but a perfect answer in His body.

G.R.C. “The assembly in Christ Jesus”.

P.L. So that Colossians 1: 18 brings Him in, “And he is the head of the body, the assembly”, and then we have “by him to reconcile all things to itself” verse 20.

• Is that everything gathered up in response; but the assembly introduced as the choice vessel of present Divine operations?

G.R.C. Very good.

G.R.D. Would you say something about the title “Lamb of God”? How far would that include the thought of what is sacrificial?

G.R.C. It stresses what is sacrificial. Apart from His sacrificial work, no persons would be retained.

• If the sin of the world were taken away without His sacrificial work, sinners would go with it, and there would be no “habitable world which is to come, of which we speak”.

Ques. So that the fire must first come upon the burnt-offering which God provides, and that should touch our hearts.

G.R.C. The sacrifice of Christ is the great basis, not only for the world to come, but for the new heavens and the new earth.

P.H.H. Have we got the new world, so to speak, now, in the baptising with the Holy Spirit? It says, “the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world”,

• but does the baptising of the Holy Spirit, so to speak, bring in a new world for us now, where the saints are what Paul would call the “one body”?

G.R.C. So that what is going on at the present time is the greatest of matters. Following this we see how all are drawn to Christ; John’s ministry draws to Christ, He becomes the Centre.

• You can thus see purification working out in individuals who are drawn to Christ, and in that connection we have His glory shining in connection with His dominion, things that were foretold in prophecy, that He is the Christ, the Son of God.

• This glorious Person has come in to fulfil all that was foretold.

P.L. But the greater things follow, and “henceforth” would be now, would it not, with us? It was offered to Nathanael by the Lord.

G.R.C. Tell us how it works out now.

P.L. Christ apprehended as the Sun and Centre of the universe of bliss.

And so the first chapter of John really brings out the great principle of purification; that is, that instead of being self-centred, we become Christ-centred.

• Christ, and God in Christ, becomes the Centre, the Object, the Motive; the whole man is thus affected.

• Therefore this great presentation of Christ in chapter 1, as to who He is, the “I am”;
  • as to what He is in manhood, the Word, the full expression of the mind of God;

  • as to what He is as the Declarer of God, whom no one has seen at any time, but He has declared Him.

• So that God is known in the fullest way in which the creature could possibly know Him, but Jesus is the Declarer, no one else.

• We do not go to apostolic doctrine for the declaration of God. Jesus is the Declarer of God.

And then John sets out His operations, how vast; the One who takes away the sin of the world! Who else could do it?

• And He has sacrificed Himself in the most absolute sense in order to lay the moral basis to put things right in the world;
  • to take man away from himself as the centre, and bring God in as the Centre. He has laid the moral foundation in His death.

• Then there is what He is doing now, baptising with the Spirit, forming the body, the vessel that is the subject of eternal purpose and counsel.

• All this is so great; not, in a specific way, the subject of prophetic testimony, but One coming out of eternity, as it were, and bringing all this with Him.

Then you get the idea of prophetic testimony, John bearing witness that He is the Son of God. That means that He is the Anointed.

• Psalm 2 shows that when the One they were expecting, God’s Anointed, should come, what would mark Him out would be that He would be the Son of God.

• So that the great centre of prophetic testimony is that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, or as Paul would present it, that Jesus is the Son of God, the Christ. Paul’s ministry is in the reverse order.

• He is the subject of prophetic testimony. We have spoken of other glories, but there is something that peculiarly draws the heart out to Christ, as we see Him as the fulfilment of prophetic testimony.

• He has come at last, the One who fulfils all prophetic testimony. The Son of God has come, and the Son of God is the Anointed of God; He is the One that God can trust.

• But then Nathanael has to learn that the anointing is not limited to “King of Israel” but, as “the Christ”, He takes up all that is His as Son of Man.

• The title “the Christ” is no longer limited to Israel, but it takes in heaven and earth, the whole dominion of the Son of man.

• So that the glories of chapter 1 are exquisite, they are surpassing, and are calculated to deliver us completely from self as a centre; that Christ, and God in Him, might become our Centre, our Object, our Motive.

Now in chapter 2, we have His own activities in two spheres. When it comes to the practical working out of purification, there is much to be done, and the Lord commences in chapter 2 what needs to be done,

• first in the sphere of natural affections, and then in the religious sphere.

• It is remarkable that in this most spiritual gospel He should manifest forth His glory, and begin His signs, in dealing with the sphere of natural affections, reminding us of Ephesians where detailed directions as to natural relations are brought in on the highest level.

• We were speaking of the darkness this afternoon as including the darkness of nature and the darkness of religion, and they are touched here.

• Satan has a foothold in both, and you find both running on in this gospel.

For instance, chapter 5 is the darkness of religion, where they seek to kill the Lord because He violated the sabbath, and called God His own Father, making Himself equal with God.

• It is the darkness, the murderous hate of men who feel that they are being outshone; they are not prepared for purification. We have all been outshone; the point is, are we prepared for it, religiously?

• They were being outshone, and they would kill the One who was thus taking away from them all their vaunted glory.

But then in chapter 6 you have the natural setting, and it is just as dark, only a different form of darkness. It is the ‘work-a-day’ setting, the setting of ordinary everyday work and relationships (that is Galilee).

• The working population were glad to be fed, and they wanted to make the Lord king; there was no religious prejudice.

• But then they were overcome by natural prejudice; they said “Is not this Jesus the son of Joseph?” verse 42, and at the end of the chapter there were only twelve walking with Him, so that He says “Will ye also go away?” verse 67.

• We have to see how darkness is entrenched, both in the sphere of nature, and in the sphere of religion. If we have got a ‘brethren’s religion’, darkness will be there.

• But then the Lord is operating so that natural relations, and the setting up of homes, might stand related to the testimony, on the basis of purification.

P.L. Is the Spirit brought in in chapter 4, in relation to distorted affections naturally, and religious darkness, both in the woman?

G.R.C. I think so. In chapter 4 we really see how necessary the Spirit is in us, in connection with purification.

M.H.T. And as purified, the woman in that chapter becomes a worshipper, and secondly, a witness.

G.R.C. That chapter shows the need of the Spirit as living water in connection with purification.

But in the first instance the Lord is attending a marriage, and, according to verses 1 and 2, He is there as by no means the centre of the occasion in the minds of those present.

• It says “on the third day a marriage took place in Cana of Galilee, and the mother of Jesus was there”, as though that was the important thing; it may be she was regarded as the principal guest.

• And then it says “and Jesus also and his disciples, were invited to the marriage”, as though that was somewhat incidental.

P.B. Is the thought in our minds that what Jesus has brought will contribute to us? and that that is not really the right way to look at things?

G.R.C. Yes. If we think of the glory of the Person as set out in chapter 1, what place can He have but the Centre of every occasion? If He is there, then the scene must be filled with His glory, and we should make way for it.

E.J.H. Would you say that two of the best things in the natural realm are here, a marriage and a mother; and the Lord waits until He is given the first place in that scene, and when He is given the first place, the whole matter changes?

G.R.C. Yes. Wine being deficient, the mother of Jesus speaks, and speaks to Him. She says, “They have no wine”, as though He would add to the occasion, not as the centre, but just to make up the deficiency.

• But “Jesus says to her, What have I to do with thee, woman? mine hour has not yet come”. That is to say, He would rebuke the natural, and put it in its place.

P.H.H. Does that open up the importance of the hour, and the way that John speaks of it? The Lord says here, “mine hour”, and in chapter 13 it says “his hour … that he should depart … to the Father”.

• I wondered whether it was in line with your thought about the Lord becoming the Centre, and controlling and dictating the operations,
  • whether in this sphere of natural affections, or whether in spiritual movements, like John 13: 1, “his hour had come that he should depart out of this world to the Father”.

G.R.C. Are you meaning that in this passage He was not in any way governed, as to the time of His intervention, by nature; He would wait for the proper time?

P.H.H. Yes. J.N.D. says in one of the notes, that in John the hour is a point of time characterised by one thing. Whether in one setting, or in another setting, “mine hour” must be very important.

G.R.C. Yes, the time when He is going to move. We have to wait for that, do we not?

L.A.C. Would verse 12 indicate that the adjustment has been accepted, where He is put before His mother? And would it be akin to what comes in in Jacob’s history, where he puts Joseph before Rachel, in Genesis 33?

G.R.C. Much adjustment had taken place, “He descended to Capernaum, he and his mother and his brethren and his disciples”. Nevertheless, things were not yet fully on spiritual lines; it says “there they abode not many days”.

• The Lord may bear with a position like that. He has the first place, and then His mother and His brethren, and then His disciples; but that is not finality, they do not abide there long.

• Abiding is a great point in John. The point is, Where is the Lord going to abide? Where the Lord abides, in a final sense, is not in the natural at all. He recognises the natural, and would use it relative to the testimony; but it is not where He abides in a final sense.

• “The Word became flesh, and dwelt among us”, that is the children of God, those who were born of God; their birth being right outside of nature, and then chapter 1: 38, “Rabbi … where abidest thou? He says to them, Come and see. They went therefore, and saw where he abode”.

• It is a great point to know where the Lord abides in a permanent sense.

L.A.C. That is very helpful. Would that include, too, the suggestion in what John refers to as to unloosing His sandals?

• I wondered whether there would be any thought of His sandals being finally unloosed, and His coming to rest in the assembly, for which John was not great enough?

G.R.C. You are thinking that John could not bring Him into those restful conditions, but we are privileged to do it. That sounds good.

E.A.K. Does the second sign, alluded to in chapter 4: 54 suggest that there has been advance, as it says in verse 46, “He came therefore again to Cana of Galilee, where he made the water wine”?

G.R.C. I think there is a link. Here we have the setting up of a home, a marriage, but there we have an established home. And that is what is in view.

• If the Lord graciously attends a marriage, He has in view the setting up of an established home, which you get at the end of chapter 4.

• It needed adjustment; and when our homes are established they need adjustment, not only on the marriage day.

P.L. Would it be the joys of the kingdom? – it is a millennial scene. The mother saying “Whatever he may say to you, do” is like the remnant in a coming day addressing Israel.

• The whole scene does not go beyond kingdom and millennial joys, and your point is that love, for its own satisfaction, could never stay in what is merely beneficent; it must secure conditions of rest worthy of itself.

G.R.C. You are thinking of verse 12, “not many days”. So that millennial conditions though blessed are not final; they would not satisfy the God who has been declared.

• When God made His name known as “I am”, it was connected with dwelling.

• He had made Himself known in connection with certain titles in Genesis, such as Elohim, and El, Most High, Almighty, and so on; and those titles were connected with promises to men;
  • but God had not promised to dwell; God promises what men feel the need of, He promises things to encourage faith.

• But while the promises meet the need of man, dwelling meets the need of God, as we may say, the need of His affections.

• And while He did give light as to His house to Jacob, in the testimonial setting of it, the thought of dwelling, from the love standpoint, comes into Exodus, when God makes known His personal name; because we dwell with people known and loved personally.

• And therefore, if God was going to dwell, He would make known His personal name, “I am that I am”. And we can see now that love was in that, for God is love.

• And so He makes it clear that He would dwell, even though there were ‘bush’ conditions. He would not wait for perfect conditions, He would dwell in mixed conditions amongst His people;
  • and that is the position at the moment, He loves us and He dwells amongst us.

• But then He dwells relative to His own work in us, which is outside of nature, even though we are still in mixed conditions.

• The millennial scene would not fully satisfy God who has come out thus; love requires the eternal scene.

A.J.G. Does not the hour really have in mind this present dispensation when the Spirit is here, and God is dwelling?

• The Lord, in John 17: 1 says “Father, the hour is come”, as though it was a period that, speaking reverently, the Persons of the Godhead had long looked forward to, and it had now come.

• Here the Lord says “mine hour has not yet come”. His hour was not connected with improving the best of what was natural, His hour was connected with the introduction of what was wholly spiritual.

G.R.C. That is very good. So that His hour would be con-nected with spiritual conditions where dwelling could be per-manent. The later chapters of John would have that in mind.

F.H. Will you say a word as to the servants. They filled the vessels with water.

G.R.C. We find that His mother was rapidly adjusted, that is, nature was rapidly adjusted, and she says “Whatever he may say to you, do”.

• So that nature stands aside, and He now is in charge so far as directing operations is concerned; and “Jesus says to them, Fill the water-vessels with water”. They were true servants. They did what they were told.

F.H. Would you indicate to us how that operates now with purification in view.

G.R.C. If we take the place of being servants, and we each would do so, in our measure, then we must look to it that we fill the water pots with water. I would think in that case the water pot is myself.

E.J.H. “And they filled them to the brim”. Do you think that might suggest totality of the acceptance of purification?

G.R.C. What a response it was! “Fill the water-vessels with water. And they filled them up to the brim”. It was thorough.

• And it is just a question of whether the water becomes wine unless they are filled to the brim. The Lord says “fill” them.

P.L. You are referring to servants. Paul says “Death works in us, but life in you”, 2 Corinthians 4: 11. Is that the water to the brim, and the wine poured out?

• And then “bearing about in the body the dying of Jesus”, v. 10; is that the water to the brim?

• And then “that the life also of Jesus may be made manifest in our mortal flesh”, and that the pouring out?

G.R.C. I think that chapter is excellent as bearing on this, because it is a testimonial chapter. We have spoken of witness, and that chapter opens up how we can be true witnesses of Christ here,

• “always bearing about in the body the dying of Jesus, that the life also of Jesus may be manifested in our mortal flesh”.

P.H.H. Do you think that the mention of ‘stone’ here would allude to something permanent brought about in the saints, although dispensationally the incident relates to the millennium?

• Is there a sense in which this goes on to some kind of completion, “the third day”; that is, in the present time of the Spirit there should be the working of death with us, fully; and then the wine available?

• Would that point to something permanently with the saints which might mark them at any time?

G.R.C. I think so. After all, the work of God in us stands related to eternity, and remains. It comes into evidence and effect in the testimonial sphere; but it remains.

A.T.B. Would you say, in relation to the water pots being according to the purification of the Jews, that it never went, with them, any further than that? There was always something lacking.

• Now this glorious Person coming in brings in a different realm altogether. It says “Wine being deficient”, and wine always will be deficient until He has His place, will it not?

G.R.C. The purification of the Jews could only be something outward, and would therefore be an offensive thing.

• But true purification involves the filling of the water vessels with water, and that means the complete displacement of self.

• John the baptist himself is the great sample of one of these water-vessels, only he is not thinking of an ordinary marriage. He says “He that has the bride is the bridegroom”.

• He is thinking of the great marriage, and he, as the friend of the bridegroom, rejoices to hear His voice, and says, “this my joy then is fulfilled”, or ‘filled full’.

• But why was his joy filled full? Because he was ‘filled full with water’; he said: “He must increase, but I must decrease”.

• John the baptist, I believe, in this section, is the great example of a water pot filled to the brim, and therefore his joy was filled full. He was a vessel full of joy; and this is the way of joy.

• We do not realise it; we think purification is going to mean loss in the sense that we have got to give up things, but purification is going to mean immense gain, because it means that our joy will be filled full.

• It is that little bit short of the brim that spoils things. Some of us have enough water nearly to come to the brim, but not quite; so we lose the pleasures of sin on the one hand and we lose the joy of God’s world on the other.

• We have retained just a little bit of self-centredness, even in our service, it may be. But it is a question of filling to the brim.

W.S.S. Does the beginning of Luke give us a picture of vessels filled – Zacharias, and Elizabeth, and Mary, and Simeon, and Anna?

G.R.C. Indeed; and what a portion God got from them. Song is the result of joy. If there is to be song to God there must be joy.

• “He hath put a new song in my mouth”, it is the joy of Christ coming forth in resurrection, all the toil and suffering over, a new song, a song that He had never sung before, and could not have sung until He had been through those experiences.

• Christ coming forth from death, greeted by the glory of the Father, and ascending to the Father says “And he hath put a new song in my mouth”, Psalm 40; 3. It is the fruit of fulness of joy.

• So that the service and praise of God depend on purification.

W.S.S. And the water becomes wine in that way; the purification becomes joy.

G.R.C. Yes, and how little we understand it, how little we believe it. If we really believed it, what an incentive to fill the water pots to the brim.

• As I say, it is that little bit short of the brim – how we know it in our experience – that little reserve of self-centredness, instead of thoroughly letting everything go for Christ, that mars the joy.

G.R.D. Was this lacking with Barnabas in wanting to take John Mark? There is the danger of nature, and its links, intruding into the realm of divine operations.

G.R.C. Nature must be kept in its place, and the filling with water would involve that all motives that spring from the influences of nature are judged.

• Barnabas, at that time, was not quite filled, he had got reserves of nature about his nephew.

G.R.D. Would you also link with nature what is national? It may have come in in connection with Barnabas and John Mark going to Cyprus.

G.R.C. Family pride and national pride are both close to us.

A.J.G. While the feast-master and others enjoyed the wine, it was the servants who had filled the water-vessels up to the brim who knew where it came from. It shows that they had got some gain out of the experience, and what the Lord had told them to do.

G.R.C. So they would be true Levites; they would know how to get the wine. Would it show how much such persons would benefit the saints as a whole?

A.J.G. I think so. I suppose the stone would be the work of God in us, which basically is ready to respond to the truth, and will respond to it as it is presented attractively in Christ. But there is the side of our responding to the truth, and taking up the exercise of filling up the water pots with water.

E.I. Is there some parallel with this and the various stages in the recovery from J.N.D.’s time onward? Are we in the best days, to which the past ministry has led?

G.R.C. We are having the best wine.

R.C. Would there be any link with this water and what is said to come from the side of Jesus?

G.R.C. I think so. The water would not be available apart from that.

R.C. Would the means of effecting this purification be presented in such a touching way, to remove our affections to make room for the water?

G.R.C. “This is he that came by water and blood”. He has brought, through His death, the means of cleansing.

• So that the water, that is the application of His death, is available to us, and it is an affectionate matter, as you say. It should not be a hardship to us to fill with water, when we think of the death of Jesus.

P.H.H. Is the water more for our state?

G.R.C. Quite so. And here particularly the state of nature, the way nature would intrude and hinder what is spiritual.

• At the same time we need to keep in mind that the Lord would come to marriage meetings with a view to securing the natural sphere of home life relative to the testimony, but on this principle of purification.

• Young people are often reminded, and rightly, that without it, the joy will run out; that the real joy, even of the natural link, depends upon those concerned being set together in the testimony.

• We see all around us that the natural link in itself does not satisfy; it breaks down amongst men.

• But it is a great thing for the Lord to have households based on this principle, where nature, in itself, is not relied upon; but
  • in the running of the home, and the appointments of the home, and all that is done in the home, God is the Centre and the Object and the Motive.

W.S.S. Would it raise an exercise as to what is the prominent thought in a marriage meeting, whether the Lord has the first place there?

G.R.C. I think this incident should teach us to give the Lord first place at a marriage meeting, so that it becomes a sphere for the manifestation of His glory; and where His disciples believe on Him.

P.H.H. So that what we were reminded about the other day [in London] becomes a practical matter, that is, that the meeting is to be an occasion for the glory of Christ.

• It would not be right to forget that the literal bride-groom and the bride are there, so that there would be practical touches in ministry given which would bear upon the couple;

• but they would be on the high level suggested in Christ and His link with the assembly.

G.R.C. How sanctifying that would be for the commence-ment of the marriage link! This water is not a question of asceticism, it is not legality.

• We are in a right way, to enjoy nature; in fact, in the literal setting, the Lord supplies an abundance of wine.

W.B.H. A.E.M. was remarking a little while ago that a great deal that obtains at a marriage meeting, might well come before the saints at a prayer meeting,

• so that the occasion might be given up more to a ministry bearing on Christ and the assembly.

G.R.C. Yes, having in view, a purified household. Not an unnatural household, not a household marked by asceticism, or death to nature, which is a heresy,

• but a household where the Lord has the place He should have; the Lord is the Object and Motive, whereas men generally, in all the appointments of the home, have self before them.

A.W.G.T. Would the households referred to in the end of Corinthians be very happy households? One of them is spoken of as being addicted to the saints for service.

G.R.C. The households become spheres for enjoying what belongs to eternity.

• Unpurified households may become centres of mischief.

• But the whole of the light of John 1 should govern our homes.

• We have to remember that those who leave the place where Christ is are defective in their apprehension of the glory of the Person of Christ.

• Christ is not accorded by them the honour and glory due to Him as a Divine Person. That would rob them of the ability to worship God rightly.

F.E.S. In contrast to that these servants would suggest a circle where we can help one another? The servants filled the vessels.

G.R.C. We would all seek to be servants to serve the Lord in some way; so what an exercise it is for each of us to see to it that he is a vessel filled to the brim with water.

• We cannot help people in our service, morally, beyond where we are ourselves. How important to have really purified Levites.

• The Levites were purified, the water of purification was sprinkled on them apart from the question of whether they had touched a dead body or not.

• Apart from any question of actual defilement the whole exercise of purification was to be entered into by them.

W.B. Referring to the brim, is it interesting that the brim of the great molten sea was ornamented with lily-work?

G.R.C. The lilies would suggest chastity and purity. You can understand that being linked with the brim.

A.G.B. The marriage becomes the setting for the beginning of signs. The purified household becomes a basis for all that God has in mind in the signs. John says he writes that we might believe.

G.R.C. In the recovery to the truth, things began in house-holds, one would judge. The truth was cherished there, and it led on to an apprehension more and more of the truth of the assembly.

• How households figure in Paul’s ministry in Europe particularly; we have Lydia’s house, the jailor’s house and others.

L.A.C. Does not purification become the means of preserving the saints in the testimony from being reduced and lessened in quality?

• The feast-master suggests that the normal course of things would be for the worst wine to be brought on last.

• Has it not been noticeable in the great recoveries from the Reformation onwards, that things have not been maintained on the level where they began? And have we not to be preserved now from a decline?

G.R.C. I think so; and I do not think there will be a decline. Some of us may decline, individuals may decline, we have all got to watch that;

• but I do not think this revival is going to end in decline; I think it will be the best wine at the end.

We have in what follows the purification of the ecclesiastical scene, the Lord cleansing it from commercialism, and what would go with it, clericalism.

• Those two things are linked in Christendom, and are things we have to face up to;
  • we have to see that our motives are in no sense governed by commercial, or clerical, considera-tions, because commercialism and clericalism are foreign to the house of God.

• The Lord “made a scourge of cords”. If we think of the history of the revival, this was what the Lord did through J.N.D.

• But it is touching that it says here the Lord made it. Think of the Lord setting to work to make a scourge of cords, and then the courage of it,
  • “he cast them all out of the temple, both the sheep and oxen; and he poured out the change of the money-changers, and overturned the tables, and said to the sellers of doves, Take these things hence”.

A.P.B. Would the Lord have the temple, which was the Father’s house, as He spoke of it, in keeping with the temple of His body?

G.R.C. As to the temple that He cleansed, we should have to apply it in our day to Christendom generally, with a view to the temple of His body coming into view in its practical working at the end. That is what you have in mind?

A.P.B. It is. Do we see the uniqueness of what there was in His actual body, what was manifest in Himself, in His life here? But then there has to be “the body” as a practical thing down here now which reflects Himself.

G.R.C. Just so. The Lord has made the scourge of cords, and cleansed the temple, doing it, in the main, through J.N.D. Luther had a part no doubt,

• but J.N.D. was used of the Lord to expose every corrupt practice in Christendom, from one end to the other.

• He exposed clericalism and commercialism unmerci-fully; and it made way for the recovery to the truth of the body, and therefore of the true temple.

M.H.T. Do we see similar violent action in the closing chapter of Nehemiah, where he commanded the Levites that they should purify themselves – Nehemiah 13: 22 – and cleansed the city from commercialism?

G.R.C. Specially there relating to the sabbath. Nehemiah had purged the house of God of the household stuff of Tobijah;

• but then the commercial element endeavoured to intrude upon the sabbath. It shows the kind of vigilance we have got to maintain.

• If the wall is up and the gates are functioning, we must not be slack, lest these practices again appear.

• What a sad thing if they appear amongst those who have part in the revival!

E.A.K. I was thinking of Zechariah 14: 21. Would it be right to say that the Spirit’s present voice is to the end that “there shall be no more a Canaanite in the house of Jehovah of hosts”?

• Would not the meaning of Canaanite, given as merchant, be over against the precious thought of the merchant in Matthew 13, relative to the assembly – the pearl of great value?

G.R.C. Very good. Zechariah 14: 21 begins “And every pot in Jerusalem and in Judah shall be holiness unto Jehovah”. That links on with the first part of this chapter.

• Here the Lord is cleansing God’s house, but in Zechariah “every pot in Jerusalem” refers to what is in our houses; the houses are in keeping with God’s house.

• Zechariah 14: 20 says “In that day shall there be upon the bells of the horses Holiness unto Jehovah”. That is something like John the baptist going forth. There was no secret about his testimony.

• Whatever our goings are, the bells of the horses should indicate holiness unto Jehovah. That is a purified idea;

• and then “the pots in Jehovah’s house shall be like the bowls before the altar. And every pot in Jerusalem and in Judah shall be holiness unto Jehovah of hosts”.

• So that all the homes of the saints, as we say, are in keeping with the house of God.

P.L. Would the expression “and all they that sacrifice shall come and take of them, and seethe therein” bear on the dying of Jesus?

• Vessels available for the suffering of Christ to find expression testimonially?

G.R.C. That is a very deep suggestion, and very searching. You are thinking of ourselves as the vessels?

P.L. Yes, “come and take of them”; a vessel meet for the Master’s use, but serviceable to all, do you think, who have the service of God in mind?

• I thought that Mary Magdalene was such a vessel. She had stood at the cross, she had entered into the sufferings of Christ; what a vessel suited of the Lord to communicate His mind as to God’s service!

G.R.C. Very good.

L.L. Does the principle of trustworthiness enter into this? Just before the close of the chapter it says “But Jesus did not trust himself to them”.

• Should the principle of trustworthiness be found with us, and the principle of purification be constantly applied, if we are to get the benefit of this holy joy in our homes and in the assembly?

G.R.C. I think that is the point of the closing part, “many believed on his name, beholding his signs which he wrought”.

• That is, they were convinced by the signs; it may have been only the natural mind convinced.

• The natural mind may be convinced by evidences of God’s work, and say, ‘There is something in Christi-anity’, and may even patronize it, without any real repentance or self-judgment.
  • There is no purification there.

G.R.C. Yes. But then, the record shows that there was more than that with him. There was something underneath. But he was not clear, the rubbish was riot removed.

P.H.H. Are we to observe that there is an inward bearing to this sign? The word ‘temple’ in v. 14 is the public building, but when they ask Him

• “What sign shewest thou to us, that thou doest these things? Jesus answered and said to them, Destroy this temple”, which is Naos – the shrine.

• Does that point to the necessity for our minds to take a spiritual turn, and observe what is inward in the signs which Jesus is doing?

G.R.C. So that the point is for us to arrive at that inward thought, the shrine itself; and, on the way to it, there is the cleansing from commercialism and clericalism.

• We must get those things away, and keep them out. There must be the purification, in that sense, in ourselves, as well as in those we walk with generally,
  • and first of all to make way for what the Lord calls “my Father’s house”.

• It is not “my Father’s house” in the sense of John 14 here, but the Lord is referring to what is on the earth at the present time,
  • and it should be a sphere of family affections, and family affections are lacking in Christendom.

• Commercialism and clericalism dominate, and we have congregationalism instead of the family.

• And so the first result, I believe, of cleansing in this sense is to bring back the saints to true family affection.
  • “By this shall all know that ye are disciples of mine, if ye have love amongst yourselves”, John 13: 35 – a circle of love.

• Then, where you have a circle of love you get the gain of the shrine, as 1 Corinthians 13 indicates.

• You have the body, and the manifestations of the Spirit, in chapter 12, set out as doctrine, but the apostle in effect says, ‘If you are to know this, you must have love’.

• And so where there are family affections operating, it makes way for us to understand the truth of the body, and therefore, the truth of the temple.

P.L. God dwelling among you of a truth, 1 Corinthians 14: 25. The temple would be where God speaks.

P.H.H. And “The zeal of thy house devours me”. Would that reflect upon our practical exercises in bringing in purification ourselves?

• Here it clearly referred to the Lord Himself, but I wondered whether the spirit of it might extend to the exercises which we are sharing together now, for instance.

P.L. So that Psalm 69, from which that verse is quoted, says, in v. 8, “I am become a stranger unto my brethren, and an alien unto my mother’s sons”.

• Is that the purification from the natural, so that there may be zeal for the spiritual, the house?

G.R.C. So that undoubtedly this should come to us by extension, “The zeal of thy house devours me”.

E.J.H. And then it says “and the reproaches of them that reproach thee have fallen upon me”.

• Where there is concern in regard to purification in a religious way, there will certainly be reproach to be accepted.

G.R.C. We have to be prepared for that.

G.R.D. Would you think that the disciples had particularly got the gain of this purification, when it says they “believed the scripture and the word which Jesus had spoken”.

• I was wondering whether the great thought of the temple as a place for divine light to shine, does not make the scripture shine, and also brings the present word of the Lord, spoken by the Spirit, in a living way amongst us.

G.R.C. I think you have the principle of the temple there, that they believed the scripture – that is, nothing would pass in the temple that had not a basis in scripture –

• but then there is what is current, and what was current at the time was “the word which Jesus had spoken”.

• Today it is what the Spirit is saying. There is what is current, what the Spirit is saying; and it shows the importance of always relating the two together.

• If we want to support what is current, it is not sufficient to go back only to past ministry; that will help, and elucidate, and carries a certain authority;
  • but if a thing is questioned, we must get back to scripture to support it. They believed the scripture. Past ministry was based on scripture.

• It is a great thing in reading meetings to get the basis in scripture; we can happily bring in past ministry when there is no conflict on, it supports; and, of course, in measure it can be brought in when conflict is on,
  • but then you must also have scripture, otherwise you will lose the battle.

A.W.G.T. “To the law and the testimony”, Isaiah 8: 20.

G.R.C. Yes. So they believed the scripture, but then there is what is current. Of course the Lord’s word was on the full level of scripture, we know;

• but then there is the Spirit’s word today, what the Spirit is saying.

• It is not part of the inspired written record, but there is what the Spirit is saying, and it shows the importance of all of us keeping in touch with what is current.

P.L. Would it be right to say that the Lord trusts Himself ‘Philadelphianwise’ to such? He makes a good deal of the temple in Philadelphia, does He not?

• And would the Laodicean setting be the Lord refusing to trust Himself to what claims falsely His name, do you think?

G.R.C. Yes. I believe Philadelphia is the condition that this gospel would bring us to, on this line of purification.

P.L. So that there is a moral judgment of all that morally lies outside of that.

P.H.H. Going back to your remarks about the ministry; I discern what you have in mind is the importance of discerning what is being said now.

• You used the word ‘current’, that, while the ministry of old may, in general and in regard of principles, be very useful, there are certain important distinctions being made nowadays; and would not the Spirit bear them out in what He says?

• So it is very necessary for us to be spiritually up-to-date. I am impressed with this expression they “believed the scripture and the word which Jesus had spoken”.

• One of the Lord’s words in each of the addresses to the assemblies is to the overcomer in relation to what the Spirit says.

• So that we would be coming short if we did not add that now, what the Spirit says to the assemblies.

P.L. Could you make an application as to the glory filling the tabernacle in Exodus 40?

• The scripture, corresponding to the tabernacle, the law and the testimony, all according to the divine pattern; but then the glory filling.

• Could you liken it, by way of application, to the word of Jesus and the voice of the Spirit, giving a character, a fulness and tone, to all that has been set up?

P.H.H. I think we can see what you mean; I am sure that is something enriching.

A.J.G. You have been referring to Philadelphia. The Lord makes a good deal of reference to His word, in speaking to that assembly.

• They had kept His word, and they had kept the word of His patience. You were speaking of the word that Jesus had spoken, the present mind of Christ.

A.P.B. Has not much that is adjusting during the last 40 or 50 years, come out in temple conditions?

• Therefore we must not belittle the truth that has come out in meetings such as in London and elsewhere, because, if we are alert to see it, we see that it is what is being spoken in the temple.

G.R.C. So that really it is in the temple we get the present gain of the Word becoming flesh and dwelling among us.

• I mean, Christ is not here now personally, but the Spirit brings to us what is presently needed, of that which is fully expressed in Him as the Word.