How can I know God's will for me personally?

How can I know God's will for me personally?

The New Testament records God's will for all believers. The largest part of our life fits within these guidelines. We must approach the Bible with objective questions about His will for us. Through His Word, we should attempt to learn and do His revealed will. Devotion to Christ motivates us to want to do His will. Looking in the Bible for what is "not against His will" indicates we are going through our Christian experience looking for as many shortcuts as possible.

In addition to the Bible's specific expressions of His will, its principles apply to our lives. Scriptural principles express God's ways. If we really want to know our God, we will gladly allow His principles to guide us.

We also learn that God superintends the circumstances of our life. If we are honest with our own heart and are willing to do God's will, the circumstances may be His means of guiding our decision.

We know, for instance, that God "will have all men to be saved" (I Timothy 2:4)." TARGET="_blank">I Timothy 2:4). But there are times when the Spirit places a special burden on our hearts for a specific sinner. This is the "mystical" side of guidance. It is a sense in the soul - always in keeping with what we know of God through His Word - that this is His will at the moment. We may be wrong in thinking we have discerned His will and therefore need to keep an open mind on this, but never doubt His ability to act in our life consistent with His revealed will.

The more we walk in fellowship with the Lord daily, the more clearly we will sense His guidance.

D. Oliver
Other pages in this section

About this site

Who is the friend of the Bridegoom (John 3:29)?

Who is the friend of the Bridegoom (John 3:29)" TARGET="_blank">John 3:29)?

The friend of the Bridegroom does not represent a group of people but is a designation for John the Baptist. In verses 27-34, John contrasts himself to Christ. Among the several contrasts is the one in verse 29. Christ is the Bridegroom; John is the friend of he Bridegroom. "He must increase, but I must decrease" verse 30 indicates that increasing greatness belongs to the Bridegroom, but the friend of the bridegroom has a passing and fading role.

This is a cultural reference. The fiend of the bridegroom assisted the Jewish groom by making the prior arrangements for his marriage. He brought the couple together. Perhaps the reference in is verse to Johns standing and hearing the bridegroom paints the picture of the best friend of the groom waiting at the bride's home for the arrival of the groom.

All of this is telling. John's water baptism (John 1:26)" TARGET="_blank">John 1:26) prepared the people for the coming of the Bridegroom. Christ's baptism with the Spirit (John 1:33)" TARGET="_blank">John 1:33) brings the Church, the Bride (Ephesians 5:32)" TARGET="_blank">Ephesians 5:32) into view.

D. Oliver
Other pages in this section

About this site

Is the Spirit

Is the Spirit’s leading relevant to assembly meetings?

We worship by the Spirit (Phi 3:3," TARGET="_blank">Phi 3:3, JND); we work by means of the Spirit (1Co 12:4-7);" TARGET="_blank">1Co 12:4-7); we walk together with others by the Spirit (Gal 5:25)." TARGET="_blank">Gal 5:25). The Spirit’s leading is essential in every aspect of our assembly life and service. If our assembly meetings do not display the sovereignty of the Spirit ("the Lord the Spirit," 2Co 3:18)" TARGET="_blank">2Co 3:18) in directing them, we have nothing more than mere ritual and empty form. The substance, timing, and coordination of our worship, prayer, teaching, and preaching must result from the leading of the Spirit. This will be very limiting to those of us who know little of His leading in our daily lives.

D. Oliver
Other pages in this section

About this site

Was Jesus robe scarlet or purple?

Why does it state in Matthew 27:28" TARGET="_blank">Matthew 27:28 that they put on our Lord “a scarlet robe” and in John 19:2" TARGET="_blank">John 19:2 “a purple robe”?

Are the references to the same garment, and if so, why are they said to be of different colours?

I do not think it is possible to evade the difficulty by maintaining that the reference is to two different robes, for in both cases we read that those who thus clothed our Lord in mockery were the soldiers present at the trial, and the circumstances are the same. But the word translated, “robe,” is not the same in the two passages. That employed by John is quite a general word, rather like our word “garment” or “clothes,” whereas the “Matthew” word is particularly used for an official military cloak. Some such old uniform might, as has been remarked, be easily found by the soldiers in the Pretoria or barracks, and would be scarlet, the usual colour worn by high Roman officials. Here the word for “scarlet” (kokkinë) is a very definite word. The word translated “purple,” on the contrary, is very indeflnite. We might almost say that the “John” word could be adequately translated “bright colour,” while the “Matthew” word gives the exact tint—scarlet. We may add that the word translated, “gorgeous,” in reference to the robe (again another word) in which Herod arrayed our Lord (Luke 23:11)," TARGET="_blank">Luke 23:11), does not specify its colour, but rather its brilliancy; it was probably made of some tissue of metallic lustre. I do not think it the least probable that this was the robe in which the soldiers dressed our Lord; it would be very unlikely that they would have access to that. It seems to have been rather a gift worthy of the acceptance of Pilate, and indeed a feeler for his friendship. Thus are the quarrels of the world patched up in a shallow and unrighteous fashion, but the hatred at the bottom of the heart remains.

W.H.

Other pages in this section

About this site

What becomes the role of those God has used in planting an assembly?

What becomes the role of those God has used in planting an assembly?

The assemblies in Crete were apparently exposed to the attacks of those who contradicted sound doctrine (Titus 1:9)." TARGET="_blank">Titus 1:9). Paul was concerned that the men who led the flock would be able to stand against such men and thus preserve the assembly for which they were responsible. Titus had a part to play in this by his teaching (2:1), but the goal was that each assembly would have men within it who possessed this capability. The role of those who plant and nurture a young assembly is to so strengthen that assembly that it will be able to function and flourish without him (or them). In speaking to the Ephesian elders, Paul makes it clear that this is also the Spirit’s goal (Acts 20: 28-32)." TARGET="_blank">Acts 20: 28-32). Remarkably, God is able to accomplish this despite the native characteristics, even of Cretans (Titus 1:12)." TARGET="_blank">Titus 1:12).

The instruments the Spirit is using in this work need sensitivity so they neither rush ahead of the Spirit’s working nor lag behind it. Circumstances differ and the rate at which this good work progresses differs from case to case. Those who are not familiar with a particular work may not be fitted to understand the timing of the Spirit’s work. Nonetheless, the goal remains the same.

Paul speaks of himself as having a role like a mother (1Th 2:7)" TARGET="_blank">1Th 2:7) and a father (v 11) in the development of the Thessalonian assembly. Parents work toward the day when their child will be able to function on his own and make choices consistent with the truth they have taught him. Some parents can so control a child that they limit his maturing. Sometimes parents step in too quickly when they see some unsteadiness in their mature child. Eventually, parents must trust the power of the principles they have instilled in their child and commit him to God in prayer. They trust God’s power and wisdom to continue the training required. Epaphras certainly practiced this (Col 4:12, 13)." TARGET="_blank">Col 4:12, 13).

David Oliver
Other pages in this section

About this site

Can social discipline be lifted for a person who has been put away from the assembly?

Can social discipline be lifted for a person who has been put away from the assembly?

Social discipline is intended to preserve other believers from doing what the offender has done. When the excommunicated person changes his behavior., social contact with the other assembly believers no longer poses any threat to their behavior. For example, when a couple put away for fornication marries, they no longer endanger the behavior of others. On occasion the excommunicated individual chooses to remove himself from contact with believers, perhaps going back into the world. In that case, 1 Corinthians 5:9," TARGET="_blank">1 Corinthians 5:9, 10 applies. He is no longer in the class of those from whom believers must withdraw.

In Matthew 18:18," TARGET="_blank">Matthew 18:18, the Lord teaches that, because the Lord is in the midst (verse 20), the assembly must carry out Gods mind on earth. Through Gods Word, the decision of God in heaven and the assembly on earth are the to the same. The assembly imposes discipline ("whatsoever ye shall bind") and exempts from or lift discipline ("/whatsoever ye shall loose") in concert with heaven. The social discipline in 2 Thessalonians 3" TARGET="_blank">2 Thessalonians 3 was temporary until the behavior changed. Therefore, the Lord intends the social discipline in both 2 Thessalonians 3" TARGET="_blank">2 Thessalonians 3 and 1 Corinthians 5" TARGET="_blank">1 Corinthians 5 to be lifted at the appropriate time.

The assembly applied the Word of God, binding the discipline. The assembly is now to apply the Word of God in lifting or loosing the discipline, thus carrying out the Lords mind on earth. Just as the discipline is not an act of the overseers, but of the assembly, and has been handled in the presence of all the assembly, so lifting the discipline should be handled in the same way.

How will the assembly know when social discipline should be lifted?

This involves a subjective judgment by the overseers in guiding the assembly. As shepherds they know the spiritual state of the disciplined person and have an ongoing interest in bringing that individual back to the Lord and eventually to the assembly. Even if there is no spiritual recovery, shepherds, who see the wanderers, will know that the time comes that he wondering offender no longer endangers other believers with this behavior.

Social discipline is not intended to heap shame on a person for all the years of his life, but to cause him to be ashamed that his sin has had such serious results and has endangered others. When his behavior no longer endangers others, it is time to end the shame and lift the social discipline.

D. Oliver
Other pages in this section

About this site

Can a Christian believe in Evolution?

EVOLUTION
Can a Christian believe in Evolution?

It is sad to think that anyone “naming the name of Christ” should forsake the clear testimony of God’s Word for the fable of “Evolution”— “Science falsely so-called.” The former declares that “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth” (Genesis 1:1;" TARGET="_blank">Genesis 1:1; see also Hebrews 11:3)." TARGET="_blank">Hebrews 11:3). Later we read, “And God said, Let there be light, and there was light” (v. 3); “Let the waters bring forth abundantly” (v. 20); “Let the earth bring forth the living creature” (v. 24); “God created man in his own image” (v. 27); and in chap. 2. 7, we have the detailed account of this; “And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life and man became a living soul.” Of course the most cursory reader of Gen. i, can see that God’s method in Creation was one of progression, from—the inorganic to the organic,— vegetation, fish, fowl, beasts, and lastly, man. We know, moreover, by experience of the things around us, that there is room within the species for the most wonderful variations (e.g., men, dogs, pigeons, etc.).

Ill-informed persons confuse this with “Evolution,” and they profess to be “evolutionists” because of such facts, which are undisputed. But “Evolution” properly so-called is supposed to account for the development of new species of plants or animals, either by mutation or by minute modification. Its teaching is that everything organic began with a cell (possibly more than one, but perhaps only one), and evolved by minute variations, into the myriads of “species” in the world, brought about by “natural selection,” securing “the survival of the fittest” during the course of “a struggle for existence.” Can anything be conceived more wildly improbable? It is only one more proof of “the Fall,” that otherwise sensible men can be found gullible enough to believe it. For such a process has never been proved to have taken place in nature.

Now, Science is something known, so that it is very unscientific to be an Evolutionist, seeing that evolu- tion is not something known; it has not even attained to the dignity of a theory, but is a mere hypothesis. The late Lord Kelvin, perhaps the greatest scientist since Newton, said in one of his last addresses, “I marvel at the undue haste with which teachers in our universities ‘ and preachers in our pulpits are restating truths in terms of Evolution, while Evolution itself remains an unproved hypothesis in the laboratories of Science” (my emphasis). Not only is Evolution a direct attack on the Creatorship of God, negativing the Scriptural account of the origin of things, but it denies the fall of man, and so inevitably the need of atonement and also, logically, the work of Christ. Shallow thinkers may profess to be able to believe the Scriptures and Evolution, but intelligent believers subject to the Word, and clear-headed agnostics, like Huxley, see clearly that the two are mutually incompatible. Evolutionists in the meanwhile continue to utter discordant cries hardly agreeing upon a single point, except that their pet hypothesis is true. Our choice simply lies between God as Creator and His Word for it, or everything its own creator and man’s word for it.

William Hoste

Other pages in this section

About this site

Should a woman not teach a Sunday school class?

Does 1 Timothy 2:11," TARGET="_blank">1 Timothy 2:11, 12 mean that a woman should not teach Sunday School classes?

Some beloved saints have come to this conclusion. Respecting their wish to uphold the Scriptures isn’t the same as agreeing with them, however.

Women are instructed to teach in non-assembly settings (Titus 2:3)," TARGET="_blank">Titus 2:3), so to require women to remain silent and to refrain from teaching necessitates conducting the Sunday School as an assembly meeting. If that is the case, children cannot say their verses, suggest choruses to sing, nor answer questions. No one should be surprised if the children lack interest in listening or coming to such a "Sunday School." If the children are saying their verses, "giving out choruses," and answering questions, then this is no different than when a husband and wife gather the neighborhood children on their back porch, in a rented building, or an available school room. Using the assembly’s building is merely a convenience for the Sunday School and doesn’t impart "church status" to the gathering.

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

What does "for as the days of a tree are the days of my people" mean?

What is the meaning of God’s message in Isaiah 65:22" TARGET="_blank">Isaiah 65:22?

"They shall not build, and another inhabit; they shall not plant, and another eat: for as the days of a tree are the days of my people, and mine elect shall long enjoy the work of their hands" (Isa 65:22)." TARGET="_blank">Isa 65:22). This echoes from the beginning of Israel’s national history in their land. The sins of the idolatrous inhabitants of the land rose to such a level that God removed them and gave it to Israel (Genesis 15:7, 16)." TARGET="_blank">Genesis 15:7, 16). When they went into that land, they received cities they didn’t build, houses they didn’t fill, wells they didn’t dig, and vineyards and olive trees they didn’t plant (Deuteronomy 6:11)." TARGET="_blank">Deuteronomy 6:11). Because of God’s judgment, the previous tenants built and didn’t inhabit, and planted but didn’t eat the fruit. God warned His people that disobeying Him would bring a curse; they would build a house and not dwell in it and plant vineyards and not eat the grapes (28:30), because invaders would oppress and spoil them (v 29).

As the decades of their disobedience mounted, they suffered tastes of this from invading armies, as in the days of Judges. Eventually, the Babylonian army carried them away captive and they suffered the full weight of the curse; their houses and vineyards were left for their captors to enjoy. During their captivity, the Lord pointed to a future day when He would regather them, judge their enemies, and cause His people to dwell safely in their land (Ezekiel 25, 26)." TARGET="_blank">Ezekiel 25, 26). They would build houses, plant vineyards, and dwell there with confidence. That promise has not yet been fulfilled, but will be during the coming earthly reign of Christ. They would no longer be disobedient and never again suffer from invaders.

The passage in Isaiah 65" TARGET="_blank">Isaiah 65 includes this blessing, but extends it. The context deals with the longevity God’s obedient people will enjoy during those thousand years (Isa 65:20)." TARGET="_blank">Isa 65:20). Even if no enemy invaded their land in the past, death would eventually intervene and someone else would live in their house and eat from their vineyards. In that future kingdom, where believers have God’s law written on their hearts, even death will not dispossess them of houses and lands. Their days will be lengthened to the age of trees, which generally outlive animal life. Horticulturalists indicate that some of the olive trees presently standing in Jerusalem’s Garden of Gethsamane were there when the Lord agonized in the garden’s dust.

The result would be prolonged enjoyment of their labors, for their days would be long on the land which the Lord gave them (Exodus 20:12)." TARGET="_blank">Exodus 20:12). The verse then assures their security (no dispossession), longevity (no death), and felicity (no departure).

D. Oliver
Other pages in this section

About this site

Main Menu