What does "known of Him" mean in 1 Corinthians 8?

What is the meaning and context of "known of Him" in 1 Corinthians 8:3" TARGET="_blank">1 Corinthians 8:3?

Some at Corinth seemed content in knowing that idols were not actual gods. They therefore were free to eat in their own homes meat that had been dedicated to idols before they bought it. Their knowledge inflated their view of their own value; love would actually have increased the spiritual value of others (8:1). Anyone whose supposed knowledge inflates his view of self has not begun to grasp true knowledge (8:2). The ultimate in knowledge is not to know about divine things, but to know and love God. Such a relationship excels mere knowledge. A believer enjoying a divine relationship is "known of Him" (8:3).

Since Paul doesn’t seem to question the reality of his readers’ salvation, this expression, "known of Him," hardly seems to be in contrast to the Lord words to unbelievers, "I know you not." Nor does it seem significant to say that God is acquainted with ("known of Him") a believer who enjoys a relationship with Himself. Paul is carrying his thought forward, though, if we view the expression as being similar to "the Lord knoweth the way of the righteous" (Psalm 1:6)" TARGET="_blank">Psalm 1:6) or "He knoweth them that trust in Him" (Nahum 1:7)." TARGET="_blank">Nahum 1:7). This is "approving knowledge." The meaning, therefore, seems to be: the Lord is aware of and smiles on one ("he is known of Him") who is living in relationship with Him, that is,who loves Him.

The Lord taught that love for God and love for others are interdependent (Matthew 22:37-40)" TARGET="_blank">Matthew 22:37-40) and inseparable (see 1 John 4:20, 21)." TARGET="_blank">1 John 4:20, 21). Such a relationship with God manifests itself in caring for others, a thought continued in the passage (see verse 12). This is well-pleasing to God.

D. Oliver
Other pages in this section

About this site

Is gospel preaching too opinionated, narrow or manipulative?

Since telling people what they must do is regarded as "manipulative," how can we preach "we must be saved?"

Part of the responsibility we have when preaching the Gospel is to communicate to audiences a Biblical concept of God -His holiness, mercy, grace, love and power. Germane to this is the truth of His authority - His absolute right as Creator to judge any disobedience to His laws. He not only "commends His love" (Romans 5:8)" TARGET="_blank">Romans 5:8) but "commands repentance" (Acts 17:30, 31)." TARGET="_blank">Acts 17:30, 31). All He says is true and it is proper for us not only to "beseech" and "persuade" but to "warn." Expressions like, "I believe" or "We have always believed," when used in this connection, are pointless self-references that carry little weight. "Thus saith the Lord" and "It is written" are the language of the evangelist, conveying to an audience that the authority behind these statements is God and His Word.

E. Higgins

Other pages in this section

About this site

Does the use of multiple loaves and cups at the Breaking of Bread indicate departure?

Does the use of multiple loaves and cups at the Breaking of Bread indicate departure?

Departure begins with a cooling of our devotion to Christ. One evidence of departure is a lack of love for and obedience to His Word. To change our practices from what His Word teaches or to be unwilling to change our ways in order to conform to His Word is departure. We are best to judge our own hearts before we look for indications of departure in others.

When we apparently take delight in finding the failings of others, we too have departed from the teachings of the Lord. If we fairly evaluate the teaching of the Bible on this subject, we can hardly conclude that pouring the wine from a common vessel and distributing it to 500 people by means of 4 cups violates the Word of God. The same can be said of taking one large entity of bread and distributing it on 4 separate plates. If this is what is meant by "multiple loaves and cups," then the answer to the question is "No." This is not departure.

To officiate at the "Communion Service" by distributing "the host" or a wafer violates the Word of God. This is multiple "loaves" and, in addition, bespeaks officialism. To have communion using individual cups fails to clearly express the significance of partaking from the "cup of blessing." If this is the meaning of "multiple loaves and cups," then the answer to the question is "Yes." This is departure.

D. Oliver
Other pages in this section

About this site

Is it possible for a person to get a fresh revelation from the Lord today?

Is it possible for a person to get a fresh revelation from the Lord today?

We need fresh illumination of what has already been written. The Spirit of God illuminates a submissive believer through the completed Word of God (1Co. 2:13)." TARGET="_blank">1Co. 2:13). However, both the gift of prophecy and inspired revelations ended with the death of the apostle John (see above).

Joel’s prophecy (2:28-31) indicates that the prophetic gift will again function after the Rapture and before the Lord’s return to earth. Daniel 12:4" TARGET="_blank">Daniel 12:4 refers to this unsealing of knowledge as individuals search the Scriptures. These tribulation prophets, the same as all the New Testament prophets, will not reveal new truth as Old Testaments prophets did but will have authority to interpret and apply existing Scriptures to their present circumstances.

God has been fully revealed in His Son, the living Word, and in His Scriptures, the written Word. The two are inseparable.

D. Oliver
Other pages in this section

About this site

What principles give guidance for ministry in an assembly?

What principles give guidance for ministry in an assembly?

I Corinthians 14:29" TARGET="_blank">I Corinthians 14:29 teaches the principle that no man is the judge of his own ministry. Those who guide the assembly should encourage men who can open the Scriptures profitably to give ministry. In the case of younger men, those who evidently fear the Lord will receive help from such kind encouragement, too. Those who speak to fellow-believers from the Word of God should be hesitant to do so without the encouragement of reliable believers. No assembly needs a "volunteer ministry" (men eager to fill in wherever they can find an opening) or an "every man ministry." Only a Spirit-prompted ministry is profitable.

Some specific principles are: 1. Honoring Christ is the ultimate goal of the message (John 16:14); 2." TARGET="_blank">John 16:14); 2. Love for the listeners and an awareness of their need motivate the message (Mark 6:34); 3." TARGET="_blank">Mark 6:34); 3. The Spirit will open the way so the occasion is not forced (1 Corinthians 12:6;" TARGET="_blank">1 Corinthians 12:6; Proverbs 25:11); 4." TARGET="_blank">Proverbs 25:11); 4. The message must be both something the speaker has enjoyed and also for the profit of all (1 Corinthians 12:7); 5." TARGET="_blank">1 Corinthians 12:7); 5. The variety of needs among believers can only be met by the varied wealth of Scripture - all the counsel of God not the repetition of one theme (Acts 20:27;" TARGET="_blank">Acts 20:27; 1 Peter 4:10); 6." TARGET="_blank">1 Peter 4:10); 6. If a message is from God, it will be properly prepared (1 Timothy 4:15, 16;" TARGET="_blank">1 Timothy 4:15, 16; Isaiah 50:4;" TARGET="_blank">Isaiah 50:4; 1 Corinthians 14:33;" TARGET="_blank">1 Corinthians 14:33; don’t misappropriate Luke 12:11); 7." TARGET="_blank">Luke 12:11); 7. The mental, emotional, and physical conditions of the hearers must be considered (Mark 4:33); 8." TARGET="_blank">Mark 4:33); 8. God-given ministry does not polarize believers, cause contention, or exalt self (1 Corinthians 3:3; 4:6; 13:4-5;" TARGET="_blank">1 Corinthians 3:3; 4:6; 13:4-5; Galatians 5:20); 9." TARGET="_blank">Galatians 5:20); 9. The value of the ministry of others must be considered so that no one monopolizes the time (1 Corinthians 12: 12, 21; 14:32)." TARGET="_blank">1 Corinthians 12: 12, 21; 14:32).

D. Oliver
Other pages in this section

About this site

Is there to be forgiveness without acknowledgment of wrong?

FORGIVENESS
Is there to be forgiveness without acknowledgment of wrong?

There are various categories of forgiveness in the Scriptures, which must be distinguished—God’s forgiveness of sinners; the Father’s forgiveness of His children; ecclesiastical forgiveness; and personal forgiveness.

As to the first named, though it is a mistake to apply to the conversion of the sinner, the words of 1 John 1:9" TARGET="_blank">1 John 1:9 “If we confess our sins, etc.,” which have to do directly with God’s children, yet it may be confidently affirmed that no sinner ever received divine forgiveness without acknowledgment of sin in one form or another, tacit or explicit, leading on to faith in our Lord Jesus Christ, when revealed. But here it is not so much a confession of particular sins, as of sinnership—”God be merciful to me a sinner.” This corresponds with “repentance unto life,” the result of the Holy Spirit’s work in conviction, without which there can be no true conversion to God.

In the case of the Father’s forgiveness to His erring children, it is conditional on confession of sins; then “He is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.” It is perfectly true that God’s forgiveness has already covered the sins in question, but His forgiveness as Father is needed, if communion with Him is to be restored. The confession should be real and full, and at once forgiveness and cleansing follow, though not often realised to the full at once. David was forgiven the instant he confessed his sin in the presence of Nathan, but later he wrote the 51st Psalm. This may correspond to the application of “the water of separation” on the third and seventh days (Numbers 19: 12, 19)." TARGET="_blank">Numbers 19: 12, 19).

As for ecclesiastical forgiveness, this is that which is referred to in Matthew 18:18" TARGET="_blank">Matthew 18:18 and John 20:23" TARGET="_blank">John 20:23—the “binding or loosing,” the remitting or retaining, of sins, not by ecclesiastical officials, the pretended priests of Christendom, but by the local church. Nothing is said in these passages of the condition attaching to the forgiveness, but the case that arose in the Corinthian Church (see chap. . i), throws light on this, for in the second epistle, the restoration of the offender is recommended by the apostle on the ground of his repentance—”lest perhaps such an one should be swallowed up with over-much sorrow”—and if they forgive him, he (Paul) will forgive also (2 Corinthians 2: 7-10)." TARGET="_blank">2 Corinthians 2: 7-10). Paul does not appeal to some leaders in the Corinthian Church, but to the Church as a whole. This ecclesiastical forgiveness has been perverted into what is known as auricular confession, and priestly absolution, things, as we believe, totally foreign to the New Testament and Christianity. As for individual forgiveness, there should be from the first a forgiving spirit on the part of the offended person; he must not bear a grudge or count the offender as an enemy, but be ready to forgive (Matthew 18: 15, 21, 22)," TARGET="_blank">Matthew 18: 15, 21, 22), but he must not express his forgiveness until the offence is acknowledged. To do so would be a subtle way of putting your opponent in the wrong, and be an insult rather than a favour. “If thy brother tresspass against thee rebuke him, and if he repent forgive him” (Luke 17:3, 4)." TARGET="_blank">Luke 17:3, 4).

William Hoste

Other pages in this section

About this site

In 2 Corinthians 8:23, does "the glory of Christ" refer to the assemblies or the messengers?

In 2 Corinthians 8:23," TARGET="_blank">2 Corinthians 8:23, does "the glory of Christ" refer to the assemblies or the messengers?

"Whether ... our brethren be enquired of, they are the messengers of the churches, and the glory of Christ." If the words are translated literally, these brothers were "apostles of churches, glory of Christ." Mr. Darby therefore translates, "deputed messengers of assemblies, Christ's glory." This suggests the lovely thought that assemblies in some unique sense express Christ's glory. This is consistent with the truth of many New Testament passages. The glory of His headship (1 Corinthians 11:3)," TARGET="_blank">1 Corinthians 11:3), Lordship (1 Corinthians 12:3)," TARGET="_blank">1 Corinthians 12:3), and sacrifice (1 Corinthians 11:26)" TARGET="_blank">1 Corinthians 11:26) are among the honors that belong to Christ and are uniquely displayed in the assembly. In fact, every detail of the design of the assembly "says, 'Glory"' (Psalm 29:9," TARGET="_blank">Psalm 29:9, NASB).

The more general consensus of translators, however, is that these men who accompanied Titus were honorable men, expressing the glory of Christ. Nameless, they carried a financial gift to Jerusalem, having been sent by the churches for this purpose (in this sense, they were -apostles," sent ones). They set the standard for all who serve God's people in whatever capacity; they expressed the glory of Christ. Since the context is the commendation of these men, this is more likely the meaning of the passage.

D. Oliver
Other pages in this section

About this site

Is it wise to counsel a dating couple in fellowship not to sit together in the assembly meetings?

Is it wise to counsel a dating couple in fellowship not to sit together in the assembly meetings?

Some valuable wisdom may underlie this advice, but it does sound like the kind of rule that some religious groups have handed down for generations. Such traditions can create a religious hypocrisy (Mark 7:6-8)." TARGET="_blank">Mark 7:6-8). Rather than making rules, why not apply Biblical principles?

Being in love is a wonderful blessing, part of the Lord’s gracious provision for the human family (Genesis 2:24;" TARGET="_blank">Genesis 2:24; Ephesians 5:31-33)." TARGET="_blank">Ephesians 5:31-33). It is part of the normal development of the spiritually-significant relationship of marriage (5:25, 28). It is therefore not a foreign intruder into a spiritual life. A couple’s behavior, however, should reflect their concern for their testimony before the world. Paul says, "Give thought to do what is honorable in the sight of all" (Romans 12:17," TARGET="_blank">Romans 12:17, ESV). Another principle comes from Paul’s pen, "Flee youthful passions" (2 Timothy 2:22" TARGET="_blank">2 Timothy 2:22 ESV). Considering these principles, a couple is well-advised to limit public displays of affection to fit comfortably within acceptable standards among believers. The world’s standards in courting are not relevant (Romans 12:2)." TARGET="_blank">Romans 12:2).

A principle that relates to all our assembly gatherings comes from the Lord’s words, "For where two or three are gathered together unto My name, there am I in the midst of them" (Mat 18:20" TARGET="_blank">Mat 18:20 JND). In all our meetings, we are in the Lord’s presence. Although the assembly is on earth, our place of worship and prayer is in heaven, in the immediate sanctuary of God’s holy presence (Hebrews 10:19, 20)." TARGET="_blank">Hebrews 10:19, 20). We enjoy an intimate relationship with our Father, but the standards of holiness in the presence of God have not changed. The same holy creatures Isaiah saw crying "Holy, holy, holy" in God’s presence (Isaiah 6:3)" TARGET="_blank">Isaiah 6:3) have not changed their occupation at the conclusion of this present age (Rev 4:8)." TARGET="_blank">Rev 4:8). When God’s presence among men was introduced (Exodus 25:8; 40:34, 35)," TARGET="_blank">Exodus 25:8; 40:34, 35), God maintained the standard of behavior in His presence. Nadab and Abihu offered "strange fire" before the Lord (Leviticuis 10:1), apparently acting with a lack of self-control (v 9). God maintained a distinction between "common" behavior and behavior in His holy presence (v 10). In our irreverent age, we need the reminder of the Scriptures on this matter. Being preoccupied with others while in the holiest of all is not suitable. Whether or not a couple sits together, they can easily become more aware of each other’s presence than of the presence of God.

Biblical principles do not establish a rule about couples sitting together. They do, however, instruct courting couples and all of us that we must seek the Lord’s help so that God has His proper place of undistracted honor and occupation when we meet together. Lacking the self-control needed so that God is first in our thoughts and desires dishonors Him. We all need a greater awareness of God’s presence and of the holiness that is fitting there.

D. Oliver
Other pages in this section

About this site

Are the "sons of God" in Genesis 6 the angels of Jude 6?

Are the "sons of God" in Genesis 6" TARGET="_blank">Genesis 6 the angels of Jude 6" TARGET="_blank">Jude 6?

Capable men have differed on this for years. Here are three suggestions for differentiating between these passages.

First, the phrase, "sons of God," does not necessarily mean angels. Three times it does (Job 1:6; 2:1; 38:7)," TARGET="_blank">Job 1:6; 2:1; 38:7), but at least 4 times this word describes Israels relationship to God as "sons" (Exodus 4:22;" TARGET="_blank">Exodus 4:22; Hosea 1:10;" TARGET="_blank">Hosea 1:10; Deuteronomy 14:1;" TARGET="_blank">Deuteronomy 14:1; Psalm 73:15)." TARGET="_blank">Psalm 73:15). This expresses a relationship of favor with God, distinguished from all others; that may be its thought in Genesis 6." TARGET="_blank">Genesis 6.

Second, in their context, these verses are the bridge between the genealogy of the godly in chapter five and the corruption that demanded the righteous judgment of the flood. Since other passages hold men - not fallen angels - responsible for the evil of those days (Genesis 6:12, 13;" TARGET="_blank">Genesis 6:12, 13; Job 22:15-17;" TARGET="_blank">Job 22:15-17; 2 Peter 2:5)," TARGET="_blank">2 Peter 2:5), the context favors the view that a lack of separation by a favored generation hastened the corruption.

The context in Jude also seems to differentiate the two passages. With Egypt and Sodom, these angels form part of one of Judes many triplets. As with those referred in Jude 4," TARGET="_blank">Jude 4, these all sinned while privileged and then suffered judgment, as those in verse 4 would. If Lucifers thought brought immediate judgment (Isaiah 14:12, 13)," TARGET="_blank">Isaiah 14:12, 13), the sin of these in Jude 6" TARGET="_blank">Jude 6 must likewise have called for immediate banishment to everlasting chains. Even if the "sons of God" in Genesis 6" TARGET="_blank">Genesis 6 were angels, they were previously fallen (judged) angels, who for a prolonged period - as is supposed - cohabited with women. This is not an illustration of those who sin while privileged and therefore suffer severely.

D. Oliver
Other pages in this section

About this site

Is the "Rapture" distinct from Christ's return to earth?

Is the "Rapture" distinct from Christ's return to earth?

The second coming of Christ Ahas two segments: the rapture into the air (1 Thessalonians 4:17);" TARGET="_blank">1 Thessalonians 4:17); the return onto the earth (Zechariah 14:4)." TARGET="_blank">Zechariah 14:4). The term "rapture," from the expression "caught up" (1 Thessalonians 4:17)," TARGET="_blank">1 Thessalonians 4:17), literally means "to snatch away" "The Lord Himself" (verse 16) comes to catch away into the air both the resurrected and living believers to "be with the Lord" (see John 14:3)," TARGET="_blank">John 14:3), for He has "not appointed us to wrath" (ch.5:9, 1:10, and Romans 5:9)." TARGET="_blank">Romans 5:9). In contrast, at His return to earth, the Lord comes accompanied by His saints (Zechariah 14:5," TARGET="_blank">Zechariah 14:5, Revelation 19:14)" TARGET="_blank">Revelation 19:14) and "His mighty angels" (2 Thessalonians 1:7)." TARGET="_blank">2 Thessalonians 1:7). At this time, He executes wrath, "taking vengeance on them that know not God" (2 Thessalonians 1:8)." TARGET="_blank">2 Thessalonians 1:8).

Another distinction in 1 Thessalonians is that Paul saw the Rapture as imminent; it could happen even while he wrote, since "we which are alive" (4:15, 17) included himself. He says the Thessalonians were presently waiting for "His Son from heaven" (1:10, see Titus 2:13)." TARGET="_blank">Titus 2:13). Again, in contrast the return to earth requires fulfilled signs (Matthew 24:3, 6, 15, 21, 29-30)" TARGET="_blank">Matthew 24:3, 6, 15, 21, 29-30) before it will occur. It could not happen today. In addition, the expression, "the coming of the Son of Man" is linked only to His earthly return. Further, the change in both sleeping and living saints at the Rapture (1 Corinthians 15:51-53)" TARGET="_blank">1 Corinthians 15:51-53) was a mystery revealed only in the N.T. It had not been prophesied in O.T. portions regarding our Lord's return to earth.

S. Thompson
Other pages in this section

About this site

Main Menu