Leckie, Albert: Ministry From Ephesians-04 ~ Eph 4:1-12

Of God. And now in chapters four and five, the apostle elaborates on the, uh, the good works in which we should now walk. And we discover in this section, as we're going to see, a repeated reference to the walk of the believer, walking worthy of our vocation, walking not as the Gentiles, walking in love, uh, walking circumspectly, and so on. It's the section that deals with the walk of the believer, and you will no doubt have noticed that this is Paul's pattern in all his epistles. He balances his teaching with that that's doctrinal, and then with that that's practical. Indeed, this is the whole purpose of the Word of God. Second Timothy chapter three: all scripture is given by inspiration of God and is profitable for doctrine and for reproof. For doctrine, for teaching us the truth, for reproof, for the proving of error, and not only that, for, uh, correction, that is instruction, eh, with regard to our character and the improvement of our character, and then, uh, instruction in righteousness, instruction in the matter of right living. And we always do well to remember that this is the pattern in God's word. There's the balance, not only that that is doctrinal, but that that is practical. We see it here in Ephesians, we see it in the Epistle to the Romans, and we see it also particularly in the Epistle to the Colossians. The practical teaching of Romans is based on the mercies of God. Practical teaching in Colossians is based on the truth of our having been risen with Christ. But here the practical truth and exhortation stands in relation to the vocation with which we have been called. That has been treated of formerly in this epistle. Thus, we keep in mind that we've entered now on the practical section of the epistle. And I thought we might divide this section today into two. You notice that in this section the apostle speaks of two unities. In verse three, he speaks of the unity of the Spirit, and in verse thirteen, he speaks of the unity of the faith. And from verse one to six, the apostle is directing our attention to truth associated with the unity of the Spirit. And then from verse, in verse seven to sixteen, the apostle is directing attention to truth associated with the unity of the faith. Now, what is the difference? The unity of the Spirit is something that we have to keep now. It is associated with the present. But the unity of the faith is that to which all the saints will yet attain. That's associated with the future, something to which one day we're all going to arrive. Thus, the endeavoring to keep the unity of the Spirit is connected with now, the present, whereas the unity of the faith is something to which all the saints will ultimately arrive. So we shall begin by thinking of verse one to six, teaching in connection with the unity of the Spirit. Now, when the apostle here speaks of the unity of the Spirit, this is rather a different thought to what he says in verse 4, uh, one body, one spirit. Difference between one spirit and the unity of the Spirit. When he speaks of the one spirit in verse four, it's the uniqueness of the Spirit. One body, one spirit, even as you're called in one hope of your calling. But when in verse three he speaks of the unity, of the oneness of the Spirit, it's the unity of the oneness that has been made by the Spirit. And the thought seems to be this, it is the very presence of the Spirit of God that makes the church what it is today. It's the oneness that the Spirit has made. Now, why is there this emphasis in this chapter upon unity and oneness? Now, you'll pardon me for reverting to this truth, for this is how the Epistle of the Ephesians has appealed to me. In chapter four, he speaks of unity and he speaks of oneness. We observed yesterday that chapter three is a parenthesis, and thus, strictly speaking, the teaching of chapter four connects with the teaching of chapter two, and I believe that we need to observe that if we're likely to understand particularly the opening section here. Now, Chapter two, we have the divine dealings with Jew and Gentile. And let me just again emphasize this, that we have in that chapter the word together, the word both, and the word one. And I believe that what the apostle is treating here in connection with unity and oneness is elaborating and further expounding what the apostle has been speaking of in chapter two. We observe quickened together, raised together, seated together, framed together, and builded together. And then we have the word both in chapter two Uh, he has made both one, he has reconciled both in one body, and both have access by one spirit unto the Father. And then we have the word one, one new man and one body. Then in chapter three, in this parenthesis, the apostle, eh, speaks of this mystery and tells us how that in this mystery there is displayed to the principalities and powers in the heavenly places the manifold wisdom of God. Now, if in chapters two and three we have this oneness from the standpoint of divine purpose and accomplishment, in chapter four there is introduced by the Apostle Paul our responsibility in relation to it, endeavoring to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace. And as we have already, no doubt, observed, it's not a unity that we have to make, it's a unity that has been made, and a unity that we have to keep. And as I said in a former meeting, this is a unity which cannot be broken vitally, but it's a unity which can be disturbed, disturbed practically, or disturbed in a practical way. But, says the apostle, giving diligence to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace, in the uniting bond of peace. Now, what does it mean by this united bond, uniting bond of peace? Again, dear brethren, if the oneness throws you back to chapter two, so also does this expression, the uniting bond of peace. For you will remember that in chapter two, three times over, the apostle speaks of peace. He has made peace. He is our peace, and he has come and preached peace. And we observe that in that chapter we have not only peace between Jew and Gentile, but peace between the soul and God. And it seems to me here that what we have predominantly is the uniting bond of peace between converted Jew and converted Gentile, remembering that the former enmity has been abolished and slain, and thus, in connection with this unity of the Spirit, giving diligence to keep it, would demand that Jew and Gentile must forget entirely what they were as men in the flesh. That is how I understand the unity of the Spirit, giving diligence to keep it, and in the uniting bond of peace. Now, in this matter of endeavoring, or a better word is giving diligence to keep it, that is to give practical expression to it, the apostle directs our attention to a twofold responsibility. Number one, verses one to two, there is a walk in connection with it that is bound up with our giving diligence to keep the union of the Spirit. And then in verses four to six, there is Christian doctrine to be observed in order that we should keep this union of the Spirit. And thus we shall speak of the walk in which eh we must walk in order to give diligence to keep this union of the Spirit, and then Christian doctrine that we must observe in connection with our diligence to keep this unity of the Spirit in the uniting bond of peace. Now we think of the walk very briefly. We have the walk mentioned there in verses two— in verse two, and you notice there are four expressions there: lowliness, meekness, long suffering, forbearing one another in love. And I think when we remember that the background is that of converted Jew and Gentile, we can readily see the significance of it. Not, of course, that it doesn't apply to us today, it does in a very real way. But you will observe that these four expressions seem to divide themselves into two: lowliness and meekness. That's selfward. And then saintward, there has to be long suffering and the forbearing of one another in love. My dear brethren, as we in our day would seek to give dil- diligence to keep the union of the spirit, we must be characterized by this: self-word, lowliness and meekness, and saintward, long-suffering, forbearing one another in love. We have touched truth that is lofty, truth that is heavenly. We have been translated in spirit out of this world. Now we come down to this world, and the apostle says, what characterizes those who are in the enjoyment of such heavenly and lofty truth as this, lowliness, meekness, long suffering, and forbearing one another in love. But not only is there the walk, there is the Christian doctrine that must be observed. And you discover this Christian doctrine, it all circles around the Godhead, the Spirit, the Lord, and the Father. Verse four, one body, one spirit, even as you're called in one hope of your calling. Verse five, one Lord, one faith, one baptism. Verse six, one God and Father of all, who is above all, through all, and in you all. Now, summing up, the apostle would say this, here is Christian doctrine that must be observed. There is one Spirit who works vitally. There is one Lord to be confessed, and there is one God and Father who must be owned. One Spirit who works, one Lord who must be confessed, and one God and Father who must be owned and acknowledged. Now then, what does the apostle mean? Against the background, uh, that I've been mentioning, I think primarily this would be the setting. Now, says the apostle, there is one body. There's not a body for converted Jews and a body for converted Gentiles. They're taken out of their respective flats now, and they're brought into the one bungalow. There's one body, not two bodies, but one body wherein are both converted Jews and converted Gentiles. And there is one spirit in which both converted Jew and Gentiles have been baptized into this one body. Now that's past. With regard to the future, it's by the same spirit. We have been called, or we have one hope of our calling, and thus there's not a hope for the converted Jew, and there's not a hope for the converted Gentile, but the one spirit has called us both to the same calling, and we have the same hope of our calling before us, whether we be converted Jews or converted Gentiles. And then, one Lord, one faith, one baptism. One Lord, whom both converted Jew and Gentile must confess. And Romans chapter ten reminds us that the confession of him as Lord is associated with our salvation. One Lord, one faith. I believe that this relates to the Christian faith, something now distinct from Jewish religion on the one hand and Gentile idolat- idolatry on the other hand. One faith. And then one baptism. Now, there might be some who disagree with me here, but I see this clearly as Christian baptism, baptism in water, as associated with the faith and the lordship of Christ. And you will remember that in the book of the Acts, they were baptized in the name of the Lord. One Lord, one faith, one baptism. And then we have one God and Father of all. I believe the thought here is this, there is one God and Father in contrast to the many divinities associated with the Gentiles, and he's one God and Father of all. That is, he is a personal God, and to him all are accountable. One God and Father of all, who is above all with regard to his supremacy, transcendent over all, and through all in the matters of providence, working through all and in all, some omit the word you, some insert the word us. The authorities are rather divided in the matter, but I believe that there ought at least to be either you or us here, because when we come to this, it's the near connection that the Father has with Son. While he is the God and Father of all, and above all, and through all, when it comes to what is vital in, it's in us all or in you all. Now, I believe that there we have what is bound up with the matter of giving diligence to keep the unity of the spirit, our walk, and the Christian doctrine that must be observed. We confine ourselves perhaps to these verses. That's up, that's up to verse six. What I can say was, can you say that the, uh, endeavoring to keep the unity of the spirit, uh, is to be expressed in each local church by observing lowliness, meekness, non-structuring, forbearance, and not as some, I believe, mistakenly think, of throwing their lot in with various questionable movements. Well, of course, anything that's not consistent with the Christian doctrine that is stated here would forbid me honoring it. Yes. There's nothing local in this epistle, is there, Mr. Well, of course, we come to what is practical here, and this giving diligence to keep the unity of the spirit, that's a very practical thing. Could you elaborate a little, please, Mr. Letty, on the difference between the, um, I guess we have to define the prisoner of the Lord in, in, uh, chapter three and the prisoner in the Lord in chapter four? In chapter three, it's the prisoner of Christ Jesus. Christ Jesus. In chapter four, it's the prisoner in the Lord, or of the Lord. Now, dealing with chapter three, I try to emphasize that there we have the unique afflictions committed to Paul in connection with the mystery, and thus he uses an expression which would relate to divine purpose, a prisoner of Christ Jesus. But here, when he touches the practical section of the epistle, he changes that to a prisoner of the Lord, or in the Lord, or a prisoner for the Lord's sake. It's afflictions which might befall any child of God for the Lord's sake. Mr. Legge, could you say a few more words about one baptism? Exactly the one you say this, especially in London, there's a lot of doctrine going on about two baptisms. We get asked these questions fairly often. Well, I don't know if you're referring to the baptism in the Spirit and the baptism in water. The Pentecostals, I'm thinking. Oh, yes. Well, uh, I think in verse four, there is one body and one spirit, even as you're called in one hope of your calling, involves the baptism in the Holy Spirit. And I fully endorse what our brother Rogers said the other day, that the baptism in the Spirit was once and for all. It took place two, almost two thousand years ago, has never been repeated. And what we've got to remember in connection with the baptism in the Spirit, it is never an individual experience. It was collective. And the expression baptism of the Spirit is scarcely a scriptural one. It's always baptism in the Spirit. They speak of a baptism of the Spirit. It's always the word in the Spirit, and it's in, it's collective. These, um, virtues of meekness and lowliness, long suffering and forbearance in love are very pointed when one thinks of the different backgrounds and environments between the Jews of that time and the Gentiles, weren't they? And of course, bringing it up to an application today, what a, how pointed it is when we think of each of our different backgrounds, but we're all so different. The Lord made us so different, and to a certain extent, our outlooks, our interests, our approach to spiritual things, how, how we must be for bearing to one another and show meekness and love. I think the expressions of long suffering and forbearing in love would imply that there must be reasons for manifesting this thing. Long suffering and forbearance. And when you remember the teaching, say for instance, of one Corinthians chapter twelve, for in one spirit we're well baptized into one body, whether we be Jew or Gentile, bond or free. Well, these are just the extremes that the devil would love to exploit. Now, says the apostle, the devil will be defeated if this is how you walk, in lowliness and meekness, in long suffering and forbearing one another, and it's forbearing in love. It's not just putting up with a brother, but it's doing it out of the highest of motive, forbearing in love. Mr. Lippi, you made mention of the fact of this unity of the spirit here, which is vital, and then you use an expression, uh, that it may be disturbed. Uh, now, is the important thing here, and I think that it's rather important to get this very clear in light, in the light of verse verses eleven and twelve later on, uh, with regard to the gifts to the body. Is the important thing here the absoluteness of the unity, or is the important thing the restrictiveness of the unity? I.e., there are those who would recognize that this unity, which has been made by the spirit, is an absolute thing. Now, are we to move in the realm of the truth of the absoluteness of the unity, or are we to move in the restricted sphere of the expression of that unity? I.e., all do not express this unity of the spirit. Now, what is the important thing? The unity itself in its absolute sense, or the expression of the unity, which is going to be restricted, um, and localized? Well, of course, there are two sides to it. The unity of the spirit is something that is absolute, but giving diligence to keep it involves practice, involves my walk and the observance of Christian teaching. Follow what I mean? Is that in the local sense, in the local Yeah, I don't think they'll hear you here. Is that in the local sense, in the local church? Well, I don't think you can confine it to that. No, not confine No. to it, but it is the local church. Well, whatever, eh, endeavoring to, eh, to keep or giving diligence to keep the unity of the spirit, what we've got to observe here, it's not the unity of the body, it's the unity of the spirit. If it had been the unity of the body, well, some would set up a body here, this is the one body. Some would set up a body there, this is the unit of the body, but it's an acknowledgement of a unity that the spirit has made. What would you suggest to destroy the unity? Well, two things. It can be disturbed practically if we're not walking according to the language of verse two, and it can be disturbed if we're not observing the teaching of the following verses. I think what our brother Mr. Brown is asking is, can this vital unity ever be disturbed? The expression of it may be, but can the vital unity ever be disturbed? And our brother Mr. Fife asked, is this expressed or has this to do with the local church, or has it to do with the universal? Well, I think that having said that this is a unit of the spirit which cannot be broken vitally. That's clear, but it can be disturbed in a practical way. It cannot be broken vitally. Then with regard to the local church, uh, the unity of the Spirit is something that relates to a unity involving all believers by the presence of the Holy Spirit, a unity that the, the uh, Spirit has made that embraces all believers. Mr. Leckie, what we may bring it down to then is that the unity of the Spirit is not seen, but the uh, expression of it can be displayed at local level. Yes, I would agree with that. And may we go on to say in connection with this that the reason why the Revised Version gives giving diligence to keep the unity of the spirit is because of the difficulty for man according to nature of reproducing the graces that are mentioned in verse two. And would it not be, uh, fitting for our purpose as representative of assemblies from various parts of the country to give emphasis to the fact that we ought to bend all our efforts to see that we cultivate these graces which were displayed in the Lord Jesus? And, um, would you bear in mind too the background of these people, that for them, these very things that Paul is speaking about here were regarded more in the character of a vice than a virtue before Christ, uh, saved them. Yes. Um, lowliness involves having a low estimate of self. I've missed, Mr. Lecky, that a man with a high opinion of himself is a very poor judge of character. Certainly hasn't judged his own character anywhere. Lowliness is a low estimate of self. Meekness is the outcome of that, evidencing itself in a tenderness of spirit. And then, Saint word, long suffering is patient endurance. Then forbearing in love is just bearing with the Lord's people and doing it from the highest of motives. We say that was making allowances because you love one another. Well, you can't, eh, bear with evil, but you must forbear with the people of God. Mr. Leddy, would you say that it was practically impossible today, with the setup that we have in Christendom, for the expression of the unity of the spirit to be seen? In this respect, that the Epistle to the Ephesians presents to us certain truths in its universal aspect, but I judge that the only way in which these virtues can be seen is in each expression of the local setting. Now, in every local setting, we haven't just got the assembly as such, but there are all the other Christians that reside in that particular area that are taken up with what we call sect and system, and consequently there is a violation of both these two particular bases upon which you say the unity of the spirit must be demonstrated. First, the showing forth of these four particular graces, loneliness and meekness, forbearance and love, and secondly, a holding of those particular tenets of the faith. Now, in a given locality, it is impossible, I would suggest, for the expression of the spirit to be seen, the unity of the spirit to be seen, because there is no, uh, outward manifested unity of the spirit, because they're all split up into various, uh, bodies. Well, I don't altogether agree with that, uh, Brother Coulson, from this standpoint, that while numerically we not, we might not be able to claim we are the Church of God in that particular locality from the divine standpoint, as embracing every believer, but as ha- I believe that where there is a company gathered into the name of the Lord Jesus, though it's not that numerically, it is that characteristically. Follow what I mean? I thought about Yes. Mr. Meki. Yeah. Well, before the Lord went away, you remember his commission in the end of Matthew, observe all things whatsoever I command you. Would the Lordship of Christ involve that? Oh, yes. Testament teaching? Yes. Then the Apostle Paul says, let him that the spirit will recognize the things I write unto the commandment of the Lord. Yes. Well, bringing it to a practical point today, there are those who differentiate, I mean, there are those who differentiate between the teaching of the Lord and the teaching of the Apostle Paul, and we certainly couldn't have fellowship with people like that, who put the teaching of the Apostle Paul in a secondary place to the teaching of the Lord, because he says it's the commandment of the Lord. I That would restrict our fellowship to those who accept the truth of God as authoritative, as coming from the Lord, whether it's given directly by himself or indirectly through his apostles. So it restricts us a bit. There is a restriction. Yes, the the thing that we've got to watch in that connection is that that isn't done in a Pharisaic way. Yes. Yes, Mr. Lenny, this is really at the root of my question. It is I knew it was, brother, yes. Pardon? I knew it was. Yes. Yes. I ask it, uh, because of the young people and so forth here, that this is a vexed question. Now, the fact of the matter is, or I want to use that fact in another way, is the fact of unity more vital than the expression of that fact, i.e., am I only to recognize those who express this unity, or am I to recognize what God recognizes, the fact of the unity? Now, we have just had some, uh, kind of, uh, restrictive idea introduced just now. Now, it is very, very important, and especially I feel when we come to the ministry, the gifts which God has given for the ministry to the body as such, it is going to affect the ministry of the body if I view this unity either in one way or in the other. So it is a vex question. I think it's not a vex question, but it is a question that should occupy, um, our thoughts here with regard to the unity or to the expression of it. I think possibly you've misunderstood our brother Buck here. He's not thinking of fellowship with individual, other individual Christians. I think he's thinking of fellowship with systems that would deny. If Mr. Brown teaching it. If Mr. Leckie would, uh, not object to this, I would like our brother Mr. Brown not to put the thing interrogatively, but to make a statement so that we can pull it to pieces. Now, wait a minute, you've got to find out if Mr. Leckie approves. The statement, if I may make a statement, uh, something like this. We ought to recognize what God recognizes and refuse to recognize what God refuses to recognize. God views a unity. We ought to view a unity. God does not see sectionalization, neither should we see sectionalization. I don't know if that's a statement, uh, sort of dogmatic. Well, of course, what I've been pointing out is this, that, um, up to this point, it has been the thing viewed from the divine standpoint, how God sees it. But now we're touching our responsibility towards the keeping of it. And what we have to observe is this, that, uh, and what we'll s- see later down when you touch the whole body, is that that makes me to appreciate and have fellowship with every individual believer, no matter where I might see him or meet him. But when it comes to the setting up of unscriptural systems, that's a different matter. But we should have a s- a scriptural system that is open large enough to welcome all God's people. I believe that, yes. Is that what you are driving at? This is what I feel that, uh, this is, this is what I want to get at, that as a flock, it is an absolute thing that, uh, that we are wide enough to embrace everything in that unity, and that we are see ourselves only as an integral part of a greater unity, and that we are not sectionalized, neither do we restrict ourselves merely to the expression of the unity, but that we must base all of our fellowship, that we must base all of our thinking on the fact of the unity, not on the mere expression of it, thus giving ourselves a restricted, an introspective, an introverted view, when all the time God is viewing things in this way, you see. Well, let's keep to the chapter now, and we'll see, uh, how it works out. Uh, there's not only a walk, but there is a Christian tenets, if you like, as our brother Coulson has put it, to be observed. One body, one spirit, one hope of your calling, one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God and Father who of all, above, through, and in all. Now, this must be observed, and not to observe this would be failure to keep the unity of the Spirit. This is the basis of the unity. Well, I think that the unity of the Spirit, it's a unity that the Spirit has made. His presence makes it, but when it comes to our diligence to keep it, there's to be the walk and there's to be the doctrine. Regarding the tenets, Mr. uh, Lecky, those tenets you've mentioned just now, would they not be held generally by most Christians in total? Well, the one that you, most Christians would say that there's one body, but there are Christians who have, as a system, set up something that denies that they believe there is one body. So it, it comes back to the differentiation between individuals and systems. Oh yes, exactly. Yes, exactly. Well now, Mr. Leki, would you tell us in what respect the system, if I may use such a word, I know this is inaccurate, but don't quarrel with that word of minute. The system with which we are attached, how is that not a denial of the one body? Well, I believe, as you've said, that if we leave ourselves wide enough to accept all of the Lord's people on the basis of what we have here, then you're not a sect. Mr. Lucky, uh, can I please put what I think to be Mr. Brown's question in my own terms? If I'm out on a Monday morning and I, sorry, if I'm out on a Monday morning and I see another brother or sister in the town who I know isn't in an assembly, and I deliberately go out of my way to meet them and to speak to them and to seek to encourage them in the things of the Lord, is that an, this an expression of the unity of the spirit? Well, I believe that that is. The point is this, that, um, there's something fundamentally wrong with any child of God that isn't happy to discuss with another child of God, no matter where they meet, the things that really matter. That's the vital thing. Surely, Mr. Leki, that the unity of the spirit takes place not on an individual basis, such as suggested by a brother Shima, but on a collective basis. Well, of course, what you have earlier, walking in lowliness and meekness, long suffering for bearing one another, that is exceedingly individual. Lowliness and meekness, well, involves my relationship to others. Will it help us, Mr. Leckie, if you tell us this? Are verses, uh, four, five, and six a definition of the unity of verse three? I believe so. I would like to ask too, Mr. Beck, if I may, that this, is this loneliness and meekness and long suffering the necessary outcome of having to do with God in the things that we've been previously considering, or is there any possibility of them being arrived at in another way? Well, keeping it to the teaching of the Epistle to the Ephesians, I therefore, the prisoner of the Lord, beseech you that you walk worthy of the vocation wherewith you are called with all lowliness. It's undoubtedly connected with the vocation with which we've been called. This unity of the Spirit here of the fellowship of the Spirit. And not just hearing, brother. Is this unity of the Spirit mentioned here on the power with the fellowship of the Spirit mentioned in Philippians chapter one? Uh, what verse in Philippians are you referring to? Your fellowship in the gospel. Chapter two. Ah, yes. Hmm. I- I think- Of the Spirit. Yes, I think that the word there is the fellowship that you enjoy, of which the Holy Spirit is the power and the energy. And I think that the fellowship there relates to the practical fellowship that they had expressed in the sending of a gift to Paul. Yeah. And it was a fellowship of the Spirit. The expression is used in the second epistle of Corinthians, where it's rendered communion. Now, what is the relevance of that expression in second Corinthians? Well, that's viewed from another standpoint. In one Corinthians one, God is faithful by whom you were called into the fellowship of his son, Jesus Christ our Lord, and every Christian has been called into that fellowship. Chapter ten, it's the fellowship of his blood and his body, that's the basis. Second Corinthians, it's the fellowship of the spirit, that's the power in which it is enjoyed, belonging to all Christians. Mr. Leki, do you mind if I put Mr. Brown another question? Not at all. Mr. Brown, had you in mind interdenominational cooperation? Yes, I did. I thought so. Interdenominational cooperation in mind at one thing, uh, that is, uh, we are not and we cannot recognize something that God does not recognize, i.e. that the absolute unity of the spirit is a vital truth to which we all subscribe, and all are in that unity, ipso facto of any given expression of it, but that recognizing what God recognizes, verses three, four, five, and six, and so forth on them here, uh, we must embrace all of those, and that our base must ever and always be that which God can recognize and that which God can bless, to the exclusion of none, neither to the mingling of something which neither heaven recognizes and and which is, um, well, as far as Earth is is concerned, is confusion. I I do have this in mind. Well, I believe that. I think that we were all just cheery about using the word that Mister Rogers has used. Mr. Letty, the walk is so important. Uh, if we're talking about the the expressions being used, wide enough to embrace all those people, but it is important that besides the tennis. That's why I said to brother Bud here, whom have you agreeing with what he said, that it's not to be done in a Pharisaic way. Discriminant reception. Pardon? There could not be indiscriminant reception. Mr. Laxman, would you say something about what things going around now, and I'm asking to the young believer now. Speak up. Speaking of the power of God and the brotherhood of man, and then in this verse, verse six, one God and father of all. Would you say something about father of all? I think, eh, as I said at the, eh, at the beginning, the primary, primary thought is this. It's one God and Father, as in one Corinthians chapter eight, in contrast to many divinities, but he's the one God and Father of all. We are all the offspring of God, from that standpoint. There's another matter, Mr. Begg, in that we've got to come to the thought of the environment where the apostle was in Ephesus, that these people have come out from worshiping gods in the name of Diana, Venus, and Jupiter. And do you think the apostle had that in mind when he's saying in loneliness, uh, lowliness, meekness, with long suffering and forbearance, because we gotta think of ourselves. We have come out of a sort of a system that have been worshiping other idols instead of our Lord himself. The Lord arrested us, that we were in, in the, well, as Mr. uh, Rogers has said, we were in the systems, and we've come out from them, and and this is the walk of the believer now, and we're in the assembly. I think it goes a bit higher than that, eh, brother, eh, Cook. It says our brother, eh, eh, eh, Stock was mentioning here, this is something that's the result of our, eh, vocation, walking worthy of the vocation wherewith we're called, and to walk worthy of the vocation that has just been brought before us in the previous meetings, it must be evidenced in this way. It links up with Philippians chapter two. Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus, who being in the form of God went right down to the depth of the cross. I had rather regarded verse six, the word all in each case, referring to all who are in the body, not as all who are in creation. For this surely is the unity of the spirit and is therefore part and parcel of the unity. Now, in this body, there are a multiplicity of individuals, and he is one God and Father of all who are in that body. He's over them all, he's through them all, and he's in all. And it little matters whether the word you in the last phrase is inserted, but I take the the word all in each case to refer limited to the body. It's only a moot point. Yes, I had thought that we, you have a widening sphere here, you know, there's no doubt that, that verse four, you have that wherein there is only what is real, one body, one spirit, even as you're called and one hope of your calling. Then verse five, um you move out to the sphere of profession, one Lord, one faith, one baptism. Then in verse six, you move out to mankind. There's only one divinity, one God and Father of all. But when it comes to, eh, the matter of Christians, there is this near relationship which involves the insertion of you or us. Mr. Leki, um, if the things found in verse 6 are the basis for the unity of verse three, how does the baptism by water fit in? Well, there is only one baptism, and that's connected with the Lordship of Christ. They were baptized in the name of the Lord. I'm thinking about people who are not baptized. Well, you must take them to this. I think we have to bear in mind the background of Acts chapter nineteen. There there were some who had been baptized unto John's baptism, and then Paul gave to them a further instruction. They were baptized into the name of the Lord Jesus. Now here's a supplementary letter, and he says, you know, there's only one baptism, that's a water baptism. I fully subscribe to that. You would have a duplication if you said it was spirit baptism. Spirit baptism is implied in the one body, but there's only one baptism. John's baptism is obsolete. All the Old Testament washings or baptisms, they're obsolete. There's only one now. Mr. Leki, you subscribe to the teaching of the New Testament is that baptism is synonymous with conversion. Not synonymous, but eh eh taking place at the same time. Is that what you mean? Almost not quite simultaneous, but eh yes, I know what the... So my um, the higher question is this, that I feel largely today we have made baptism be more synonymous with um, should I say, entrance into the I s- I see what you mean. Well, baptism is related to the teaching of baptism is related to salvation and not related to assembly fellowship, which makes it more important. Yes. It's an individual argument. Yes. I'm trying to believe, uh, when we last night we were dealing with the subject of the will. I'm trying to believe this morning that there's something here that God cannot make us do. We've got to obey this ourselves, and that is why today there is so much schism amongst us. We're not all of being obedient to this word. Consequence, instead of being assembly lovely, we have all sorts of places which are contrary to God and which are displeasing to his heart. Do you agree? Yes, and I, I feel too, uh, brother, that what we have to observe is this. It's not so much a matter of standing in condemnation of them, but if you're endeavoring to keep the unity of the spirit, you'll seek to win them. Right. Mr. Leddy, can you clarify, please? I think this is important because it's a question that is continually popping up in our assemblies throughout the length and breadth of this country, and no doubt throughout the world. To take up this word that Mr. Rogers coined for us just now, interdenominationalism, surely we ought to clarify verse clearly. I believe with all my heart with our brother over on my left here that it's possible for me, as a believer in the Lord Jesus Christ, to have fellowship with every individual believer that I know. I know a Baptist minister in Nottingham with whom I started to begin the study for the Baptist minister. He's a fully pledged Baptist minister, and I make no bones about it. I go to his house, I come to see him, I speak with him on the scriptures and so on. He speaks with me. But the question is this, is the basis of the unity of the spirit based upon individual fellowship such as this, or is it based upon collective? Collective in the sense that I can feel myself free to gather with a company of people that, in some way or another, violate either the practice or the doctrine or the grace of the particular passages here. Now, I think we ought to clarify this in order that we might Well, I think the answer to that, uh, Brother Coulson, is this: it begins with what is individual, but must find an expression of what is collective. You know what I mean, the individual exercise in the matter of keeping or giving diligence to keep the unity of the spirit. Yes, what I have in mind, you see, is this word endeavoring, endeavoring to keep the unity of the spirit. Now, some brethren will endeavor in the sense that they say, yes, we'll have fellowship with, with our brethren in the denominations, uh, assuming them all to be Christians, which they are, but assuming that they are for this purpose. And they endeavor to keep the unity of the spirit by bringing themselves down to the level of the systems, in the sense that they are prepared to ignore items or issues upon which they know they will come to controversy. Now, this is, let's bring it down to factual issue here. These campaigns have come to Britain now and again under various auspices. Uh, in order to have fellowship with these sort of things, we've got to be prepared to compromise the position that we find here. Without making ourselves as a critical or superior, we've either got to forget the issue of baptism as a practice, we've either got to deny the position of a doctrine such as the one body. Now, this is not the meaning, I don't think, of endeavoring to keep the unity. In other words, you don't endeavor to keep the unity by, by capitulating on the issues that God has laid in his work. Now I feel that this ought to be made clear in this. Oh, I agree with that, Brother Coulson, yes. Perhaps, Mr. Lecky, if we notice that the word keep means to guard it. To guard the unity. That is, we, we, we don't allow anything to disrupt the unity. This is not merely, though, the expression of the unity, that the, that the unity exists already. And that unity existing already, all we are called upon to do is to keep that unity, to give expression to it, which must start off, as far as we are personally concerned, as an overall fact, an overall fact into which I merely fit as, uh, as a small part in the overall, a small jig in, in, in the puzzle itself, that, uh, my giving expression to it brings out in clarity, brings out so much more clearly to all around this great thing which is existing, and the ecumenical movements and all these other kind of unity movements, they start from a wrong proposition. They start from a wrong base. That it is not merely that I as an individual must seek unity with you, but rather that the fact is already there, and the fact already being there, I am merely giving expression to it. Which leads me on now, uh, to the fact of the thing that not only those who are giving expression to the unity of the spirit characteristically here do I recognize, but I must also recognize all who are characteristically giving expression to this unity of the spirit, no matter where I may find them. Mr. Brown, will you define what you mean by giving expression to it? Yes, that this unity of the spirit is with all those who have the spirit, who are indwelt by the same spirit. May I ask when and where and how? Wherever and whenever I come into contact with it. You do not limit it to a local assembly. I limit... how do you mean? Oh, no. I mean, just give it, I'm, I'm only asking for the benefit of us all, giving expression to it, you are not limiting in your mind to a local assembly. Um, if by a local assembly we mean the technical expression of a known circle of fellowship, know that wherever I find a unity of the spirit being given expression to by local saints as such, as local saints, then here I must also endeavor to give practical expression to it. And we- Now, wait a minute. You have said an expression, uh, a company giving expression to Yes. this unity. How do they give expression to it? They give expression to it by meeting together and to demonstrating in the one sphere of the body. And that's what I wanted you to say. Now, over to you. Now, make an observation. I've given a lot of thought to this chapter, insofar as, in as much as Speak a little like that. I've given a lot of thought to this chapter, in in as much as it's involved me personally, uh, in connection with a testimony. Now, I think it's been expressed already this morning that we can have no fellowship with those who hold the doctrine of the Lord's words being superior to those of the Apostle Paul. Now, in principle, we all agree, but practically, when this is expressed in an assembly, we must keep the unity of the spirit in the bond of peace, guard that unity. Now, I've been in an assembly where this doctrine has been propounded. The easiest thing to have done would have been to have exercised the flesh and to have split the gathering into two, but this would not have guided the unity of the spirit in the bond of peace. Now put it further in this way. In the churches in the second and third chapters of the Revelation, we have combined there almost every form of activity of Satan, either in wrong doctrine, wrong practice, let's think of those two things. Now, if I'm a member of any of those seven churches in the Revelation, and things come up that are expressed there, which are derisive of the unity of the Spirit, my position surely must be this, that I cannot leave that assembly. This would be a denial of the unity of the spirit. It would break that notion. What am I to do? Well, I'm to be an overcomer and stay in that assembly and exercise this loneliness and practical, practical expression in the endeavor, the giving diligence to, to keep it through loneliness, meekness, long suffering, and forbearance. So that that which is wrong, whether it's doctrinal or otherwise, eventually is put right. I think this we can have no fellowship with is something that brings division straight away and tends to spoil this unity, this expression of the unity among the gatherings. Now just make one further point. This is something that I've given a lot of thought to, this is high stuff, and a lot of exercise over. It's too easy to break with the people of God and go to another gathering or to set up another. I believe the principle is to stay where we are and to give expression to it, realizing that this is based on the exhortation contained in the letters to the seven churches in the, in the chapters 2 and 3 of the Revelation. Of course, that involves a, a real, eh, amount of issues, eh, Brother Penfold. If you are in an assembly which has been, which is of God, no assembly is immune from erroneous doctrine. And I must remain there to endeavor to help have this purged. But if in the course of time this becomes an established thing, and it's proved that this is not just a phase, but something that's established, then I might have to have definite exercises about, eh, my having further fellowship with them as a company of the Lord's people. See, everything would have to be judged according to its own particular circumstances. Now, for instance, if I was in a company and they began to hold and teach something relative to the person of Christ that was serious. I find it very difficult to continue there. See what I mean, brother Pendo? I do, brother, but on the other hand, whilst you would find it, and I should too, and we all would find it extremely diff- difficult to continue there, this very thing did exist in the seven churches mentioned in chapters 2 and three. this type of doctrine. Now this is a straight blow in the face of the Lordship of Christ. But nowhere in those letters are we told for the overcomer, who I understand to be the one to whom the letter is addressed in each case, to leave the gathering, but to overcome into it. This is really the point I'm trying to make. Perhaps some of us have felt at times that we could leave the gathering. That's the easiest way out. I have. But in staying on and exercising what we have in verse 2 of this chapter, seeking opportunity by the power and and guidance of the Spirit to give the the further verses four and five, the teaching of the truth of the one, uh, the seven aspects of the oneness. Uh, I believe many a situation could have saved. I know of one that was saved, and this uh expression of the unity of the spirit, the unity of the spirit was was really expressed. Of course, against all that, we must remember, Brother Penfold, that the unity of the spirit can never be expressed by giving divine sanction to error in relation to the person of Christ. It could never be. But if this might be a phase in which you can help, then by all means you must remain. I think you've got to decide whether it's a phase or it becomes an established, eh, uh, settled state of things. Mr. Lecky, might I say that concerning what we recognize to be a gathering, surely the words of verse five in one Lord stand there. We must recognize that one Lord. And while, now I know Brother Penfold well, and he'd be what, uh, many people would call a tight brother. Don't think that is of a given any loose doctrine. While, um, while, uh, our brother observes that in the book of the Revelations chapters, the Revelation chapters two and three, we have no injunction for the saint to come out from those people. We have from the Lord this warning that unless they repented, he would come out from them. He would remove the lampstand. Then it would be necessary for those who recognize the point has been reached when the Lord has removed the lampstand, for them to be where the lampstand was. Isn't it indicative in Revelations two and three that allowing error to stay indicates where you land in Laodicea? Thank you, in one of the churches, the Lord was actually standing outside, wasn't he? He wants to get in. I don't know that that's altogether true. Behold, I stand at the door and knock. That's not the door of the assembly. If it were, there's only one in it, I will come into him. That's not the door of a gospel hall, brother. You know, it was written to this church, wasn't it? And the Lord was knocking and he said, if any man open, I'll come in. Either he was in the church or he wasn't. Are you going to just going to do that now, yeah? Thank you, mate. Sorry, brother, go on. May I just, uh, if we are, um, shortly going on to the next, uh, few verses, um, bring out a few, uh, thoughts I've got on on my heart with regard to this, uh, this phrase, there is one Lord, the Lordship of Christ, so important that we should think about in so many aspects. To begin with, we confess him as Lord to salvation, as we've just seen, and then we also acknowledge that he is Lord of all, that one day every knee is going to bow to him in heaven and on earth and under the earth. But thirdly, we have the Lordship of Christ in a connection with the assembly, where two or three are gathered together unto my name, and there is only one Lord of a local assembly, and that is Christ. He is the one Lord, and he guides the each of the members. But then, um, we go on and we see the lordship of Christ in the individual. Now, there are three aspects to this, aren't there? There's obedience first, obedience to the Lord's commandments. And then there's the matter of guidance of the Lord, guidance in the matters of decisions that sometimes have to be made. And thirdly, um, submission, an ability to submit to the will of the Lord in one's own life. Now that's the Lordship of Christ in connection with the life of the individual. But then we go on to yet another aspect, the Lordship of Christ with regard to Christians living with one another, perhaps in an assembly. Now, this is one of the death blows, isn't it, to the party spirit. Would that we could all realize that if a person does something or thinks something, it's as unto the Lord they do it, and it's to the Lord and him alone that they answer, and not as unto an individual person. If this were the case, we wouldn't want to gather parties around us, nor would we want to go and join sides with people, but Christ would be Lord of all. So the Lordship of Christ is something that's of ultimate importance in these days. Uh, regarding verse five, one baptism, for the sake of us young believers, uh, may I say that I believe that baptism is obligatory on the child of God, not in relation to their salvation, but in relation to the will of God. It's related to their salvation, undoubtedly, but, eh, carrying out of the will of God. When I said related to their salvation, I was making a contrast between salvation and reception into assembly fellowship. There is quite a body who come into the assembly and have been sprinkled, uh, either in the Church of England or other, uh, denominations, and feel that there is no need for baptism because of that situation. This is one of the portions that make baptism so tremendously important, in my judgment, that amongst the other things where he speaks of one body, one spirit, one hope, one Lord, one faith, one baptism. So nobody could ignore one baptism in the light of Ephesians. I'd like to have that clear. Chapter four. Now, with regard to the next section, from verse seven to sixteen, where the apostle, uh, speaks of the unity of the faith there in verse thirteen, till we all come or arrive at the unity of the faith under the knowledge of the Son of God. Now, just as we observed that the unity of the Spirit is different from the one Spirit, so now we observe that the unity of the faith is different to the one faith of verse five. The unit of the faith here in verse thirteen, uh, I believe refers to the, the faith as a whole. The faith as a whole. Now, moving on from that, I believe that this word unity not only qualifies faith, but the knowledge of the Son of God. And thus the verse reads, till we all arrive at the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God. It's the unity of the faith and the unity of the knowledge of the Son of God. And I believe that the second is explanatory of the first, that the unity of the faith is qualified by this. It's the unity of the knowledge of the Son of God. Now, it's evident from verse thirteen that here we have the ultimate, till we all arrive or come to the unity of the faith and the unity of the knowledge of the Son of God, to the complete spiritual harmony in the matter of the faith as a whole. And the wonder of all this is just this, that this will be the full knowledge of the Son of God. And I think that when Paul says until we all arrive at this, it would seem to suggest that the Apostle Paul counted himself even then amongst those who were expecting to arrive at it, involving that even then the apostle was, eh, contemplating the return of the Lord. But I think that's when we shall arrive at it. Now, this, of course, awaits the completed church, when it shall be seen, as Paul goes on to say, as a perfect man, a full grown man. In chapter two, as we saw, it's one new man that's now, but here it's a perfect man that's in the future. We arrive at this, the unity of the faith and the unity of the knowledge of the Son of God, a perfect man. And this perfect man is explained by what, what it fo- follows, the measure of the stature of the fullness of the Christ. The word measure means the proper standard. The word stature means the adultness of the fullness of the Christ. I believe that's Christ mystically. The church as his body, his complement, not only without one member, not any member missing, but the whole perfectly displaying Christ as her head. I take that to be significance, the fullness of the Christ. There won't be one member missing and the whole displaying the, the head Christ himself. Now then, from verse seven to eleven, we have, uh, God's provision until the, from verse seven to sixteen, we have God's provision until the ultimate is reached. And we might think of this in two ways. From verse seven to eleven, we have the Lord's unfailing provision until the ultimate is arrived at. And then verse twelve to sixteen, the desired effect of the Lord's provision on his people even now. Thus we have the ultimate. The unit of the faith, the knowledge of the Son of God, perfect man, the measure of the stature of the fullness of the Christ, and then we have the Lord's unfailing provision until we arrive at that, and the desired effect of his provision on his people. Now we think briefly of the Lord's unfailing provision. I want you to notice in this connection three words or three expressions. Verse seven, every one of us is given grace. Verse eight, he gave gifts unto men. Verse eleven, he gave some. Now think of this, verse seven: every one of us, or the word is each, each of us. Then verse eight: he gave gifts unto men, not to each now, but the word is men. Then verse eleven: he gave some. Now we'll deal with it in that way. To each one of us is given grace. Each, without exception, has been given grace for the discharge of our particular function in proportion to the giving of Christ, in proportion to the gift that we have received from the Lord, the measure of the giving of Christ. And thus, to each one of us, Christ has measured our gift according to the work that he has allotted to us. And not only that, he has given grace for the carrying of it out. Notice it's not authority, it's nothing official, it's grace for functioning of carrying it out. And then, verse eight, he gave gifts unto men. I think the thought here is this, viewing at its context, that the gifts have not been given to angelic beings, but gifts have been given by the exalted Christ to men. Men in contrast to angelic beings. And of course, in verse eight, we have a quotation from Psalm sixty eight. And when you go back to Psalm sixty eight, you discover that the picture there is of the victor, um, ascending, the victorious king in triumphal procession, attended by a long train of his captives, and he's giving gifts to the crowds. It's a triumphal king in his victorious procession, leading captives and giving gifts to the crowd. That seems to be the setting. Now, keeping that in mind, what do we find? This is related to the person of Christ. When he ascended on high, he led a multitude of captives in captivity, and thus gifts are the visible trophies of the glorious victory of Christ over the enemy. And in his victory over the enemy, we have his victory over the enemy that would have hindered God and Christ from giving blessing to man. Now, from that, you'll gather that I don't believe that this leading captivity captive has to do with the Old Testament saints being taken out of paradise. I think the background is this, Colossians chapter two. at the cross he destroyed, he stripped himself off principalities and powers and made a show of them openly. And in his ascension, he rode in triumph through their very domain, the victor, leading a multitude of them in captivity, and then as the victor, having subdued the enemy in his triumph, he gives his trophies, and the trophies are his gifts to men. Now, verses nine and ten are interesting. Verse eight speaks of the heavenly source of the ministry. Now that he ascended, what is it but that he also descended first into the Lord, verse eight rather, when he ascended on high, he led captivity captive and gave gifts unto men. There's the heavenly source of the ministry. It's when he ascended on high, he gave gifts. And then when we come to verses nine and ten, it's the heavenly source of the work of redemption. Thus he says in verse nine and ten, now that he ascended, what is it but he also descended first into the lower parts of the earth? He that descended is the same also that ascended far above all heavens. In other words, the apostle says, that's where he is, but that's not his native sphere. He come down first, he come down in grace, and he's gone back on high in triumph. And it's this one that has given gifts to men. But notice the language of verse ten, that he might fill all things. And I believe this anticipates the future that we have in Ephesians chapter one, the fullness of him who filleth all things, and this will be his triumph in the day that's yet to be. He shall fill all things, but the verses that follow make it clear that he has a present interest. And what is his present interest? The church. And what will be the ultimate of that? Verse thirteen, the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ. Now then, he gave some, not just now men, but he gave some, verse eleven. And here it's not gifts that are given to men, but he has given some men as apostles, prophets, evangelists, pastors, and teachers. And we can think of that now. We won't go into the details as time is going on. Then the desired effect of the operation of these gifts is for the perfecting of the saints. In fact, there are three words I'd like to notice, and with this I'll sit down. Verse twelve, for the perfecting of the saints. Again, verse twelve, another two words. For should be with a view to the work of the ministry and the edifying of the body of Christ. Then verse fourteen: that, or in order that we be no more children. Now, to me, this is most precious. Here's the desired effect. First of all, it's for the perfecting of the saints. Secondly, it's with a view to the work of ministry and the edifying of the body of Christ, and it's having this in view that we be no more children tossed to and fro by every wind of doctrine. I won't say any more as time has gone rather quickly. Still, in connection with that tenth verse, you referred to the future till all things. Yes. But is there not a sense in which we're living in a world that's not a Christ-deserving world? He's gone back to heaven, but is there not a sense in which his presence now fills all things, so that his people may enjoy the promises of Matthew, for instance, where two or three are gathered together and they blow out with you all way, and uh, Romans will come into it, I believe, where it says the word is neither, uh, indicating that the unbeliever, the presence of Christ is near at hand for uh, the needs. We're not in a Christ-deserted world. No, I don't, well, I think that the expression all things would prohibit what you're saying, uh, uh, Harold. I gather that, uh, Ephesians chapter one, the church which is his body, his fullness, the fullness of him who filleth the all things. And I believe it's the filling of the all things with himself, and he's referring back to what he's already stated, the heading up in one of all things in Christ, and everything that's headed up under him will be filled with him and take character from him, and that's what he's going to do in an age to come. Dispensation of the fullness of times. Now, says the apostle, that's what he's going to do in the future, but before he arrives at that, he has an interest now, and that's the church, and he'll not be satisfied until it has arrived at a perfect man under the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ. I think that's what it means. Do you agree, Mr. Lecky, that much of the difficulty that I mentioned in assemblies and our brother Ken Pope stems from the failure to recognize the gifts and assuming that every man has a gift of ministry, of edification? Yes, there is. I mean, there's people assuming we haven't got, we despise one man ministry, but now we've got all man ministry. One Corinthians 12. Do you call it ministry? One Corinthians twelve, Paul asked the question, are all teachers? With the obvious answer, no. And it would have us appreciate the error of any man or every man ministry, if I might use the word ministry. It's all are not teachers. Would you say, Mr. Leki, that in connection with this question, that the word perfection is at least major given for the purpose of adjusting and amending, whatever our understand that word, the sites of buying their service and do the work of service. Yes, perhaps I should just say a little word on this. Apostles and prophets, as we have seen, have laid the foundation, chapter two. That leaves us with evangelists, some pastors and teachers. Now, the evangelist, what does he do? The Lord adds daily such as should be saved, and he's connected with the adding by the Lord daily of the saved ones. He goes out to bring in, and he brings into the sphere of the pastor and teacher. Now, the omission of the word some before teacher is important. Some have thought it that it, that it's in the same person, but I don't think it necessarily is in the same person, but it would involve this, that at least the work is inseparable, pastor and teacher. It might refer to chapter five, where the Lord nourishes and cherishes his church. He nourishes it with the teacher, and he cherishes it with the pastor or the shepherd. And this all has in view the perfecting of the saints, the equipping of the saints. This word perfecting is the word that's used for the mending of nets and the restoring of a bone. And thus, this brings us back to Brother Butt's suggestion that these gifts have been given not to divide the saints, and real gift is never divisive in its character. It's the bringing of the saints together and equipping them unto the work of ministry, that is serving each other, and unto the self-edification of the body of Christ. In other words, these gifts are not the be all and end all. Which are not an end in themselves. Would you define the ministry in verse twelve? Is this a, a calling as much as there is the legal No. work No. and the medical? Is this the ministry? No, it's the ministry in the sense of serving one another, a mutual serving of one another. And I think, uh, just before I, I finish this, that, uh, we've got to observe that these gifts are given, that the saints might be brought together so that they will mutually serve each other, and there will this be self-edification in love. Now, uh, Brother Rogers was just directing my attention last evening to how that after the meeting, here were some saints here and some saints there all around the world. Now, I believe that's the idea here. The gift is not the be all and end all, but it is a view to the setting of the saints in right relationship to each other, that they will mutually serve each other, and amongst them there will be the self-edification in love. Mr. Leki, one of this to you and then perhaps Loudest. If yourself and then perhaps Mr. Rogers afterwards. I haven't time for that. No time for that. Well, Mr. Leki then. Uh, would you suggest some measures that we could take to, um, stop this any man ministry or to seek to correct it so that, uh, those who have the gift may exercise it for the glory of God and the good of the saints? Well, there are different answers to that, Jack. I suppose that, eh, those who take the lead in an assembly ought to do it, but the tragedy, of course, is this, that sometimes those who take the lead are those who are most guilty. Yeah. See, we can, you can view ideally, but the great trouble is this, that you don't get ideal conditions that make that ideal thing possible, and thus prayer, I think, and, eh, influence is perhaps the best way of dealing with it. Mr. Leki, could you define the sphere of operation of these men whom you have described as gifts? Um, one of the answers may well be, of course, uh, of this one-man ministry, that if those men who, who are the gifts, if they threw away their diaries and concentrated more and more, perhaps in a given area, you wouldn't get Tom, Dick, and Harry jumping up, uh, just for the sake of jumping up. That if there was a ministry there, that it would be conducive to the edification of the saints, instead of the mother being here, there, and everywhere, all over the world. What is the sphere of ministry of these names here in verse eleven? Well, you've got to observe, Brother Brown, that, uh, you ha- you've got to distinguish between the man who is the evangelist and the man like Timothy who, though not necessarily being an evangelist, could do the work of the evangelist. You've got to distinguish here between the teacher of Ephesians chapter four and the elder who in his locality is apt to teach. Thus, a local assembly should not be altogether dependent on these men, but have within its, within its fellowship, those who can maintain its spiritual growth. Do these gifts, these prophets, teachers, shepherds, and so on, move about the church in general, or are they located in one church in particular? I don't think this is local in the Ephesians chapter four. Then what about the pastor, Mr. Lucky? I know you liked it, but the, but you did say that for the shepherd individually. We don't see this, do we? Certainly, it's diff- a different kind of service. The, the brother who is the shepherd of the pastor is the brother who, by his ministry, his service, will touch the heart and the conscience of the saints. Whereas the brother who is the teacher, he will impart to them divine truth. Thus, both are necessary. Mr. Letty, we have a practical example of this, surely, in Acts eleven, where those that were dispersed with the Lord preaching the word, and some were saved, and when they were saved, they sent Barnabas, who exhorted them with purpose of heart, please the Lord, for he was a good man and full of the Holy Spirit. And having counseled them and shepherded them in their newfound faith, and having, uh, wisdom enough to realize the extremity and extent of his gift, he then departed to Damascus for to seek the Saul, Yeah. who, when he would then come, taught them by the space of a year, or twelve months. Which seems to suggest to me that he was a full-on view of the gift. Evangelist, pastor, and teacher that the apostles, that the Lord has given to the church. Now, I understand the import of Mr. Brown's remark is this, that in the same way that we see this picture in Acts eleven, where there was a newfound company of the Lord's people without direction, without any orientation, they had to be first counseled and tended half-wise and then taught into their mind. Would you think that our assemblies in some respects are so degenerated, in the sense that there is insufficient gift in the assemblies to maintain them in a worthy like manner, so much that there are those in the assembly who are not gifted and are taking the lead and shouldn't, that men like yourself and other itinerating brothers would find it more profitable under the hand of the Lord to, shall we say, consolidate their movements and their efforts in seeking to build up in that particular locality where they're exercised to go under the hand of the Lord, so that once they have built that company up, they can then leave the bed and move on to somewhere else, instead of going this place in one night stand, that place in one night stand, and that place in one night stand, and to all intents and purposes, uh, achieving nothing. Uh, now this is, I think, is the back of Mr. Graham's mind. He's too polite to say it. Can I just say here, I have this difficulty living in our own assembly, the desire of some, one or two, to have the open platform. But as I have observed that, you see, in our locality, we have not got all the believers that should be there from the other denominations. Had we got the saints there, then I believe we would be able to exercise those gifts locally and thus be a local church, as is observed in the New Testament. I think the failure is that the believers around are scattered and not in the local church. I think so. That's the same. I don't believe that the evangelist was ever intended to work in the gospel in connection with the local assembly. That was, that would be provided all the believers were there, but because of the weakness of all believers not being there, they have to bring them in.