10 replies to this topic

[Jesus_Lolly]

I read this Scripture this morning, and it ripped into my heart. I realized that I

am guilty of wearying the LORD. I have wearied Him at times by giving too much leeway

to the evils committed against Him. On the other hand, I have been too condemning of God's

failure to act (without even being consciously aware of it). I am grieved, and I am reading commentaries to get a clearer picture of the passage:

 

Ye have wearied the LORD with your words. Yet ye say, Wherein have we wearied him? When ye say, Every one that doeth evil is good in the sight of the LORD, and he delighteth in them; or, Where is the God of judgment?

[Phil]

Do not grieve. We have a loving, forgiving GOD. Remember what Jesus said, go and sin no more. You are forgiven. Rejoice! 

[Tkulp]

God wants Pure Sacrifices

 

"Thy Word have I hid in mine heart, that I might not sin against Thee."-- Psalms_119:11.

 

http://www.youdevoti...om/walk/april/7

 

 

A sacrifice was to be pure, without blemish, in the Old Testament.

 

Jesus was that sacrifice for us. He had no blemishes, no sin.  Everyone has been born in sin, with a sin nature, bound by the power of the old nature, the flesh, the senses and selfishness; except Jesus. 

 

The miracle of the cross is that anyone that will repent, except the cleansing blood of Christ, daily take up our own cross, keeping the senses and selfishness dead; will be free from sin and the old nature's power.

 

We will, in continual obedience to the Holy Spirit, which we can have living within, be able to present ourselves as a living sacrifice, holy and acceptable, as all sacrifices are supposed to be.

 

As we live under true grace (the divine influence that is reflected in how we live, talk, etc.), remove all conformity to the world and its ways, we will be pure, holy, blameless, as the Word of God teaches.

 

We are, according to Paul, to present ourselves as living sacrifices,  holy (sacred (physically pure, morally blameless or religious, ceremonially consecrated)) acceptable (fully agreeable) which is our logical, reasonable, service.

 

 (acceptable  - From G3000; ministration of God, that is, worship:) (G3000 - From ??????? latris (a hired menial); to minister (to God), that is, render religious homage:)

 

How many, that call themselves by the name of Christ, believe any of this? As I view the writings and observe the appearance, listen to the things that are talked about, etc.; most modern 'professing' 'Christians' are more conformed to the ways of the world than influence by or conformed to, the ways of Christ (Christ in them, or they in Christ, with the evident fruit, flowing out of their lives, establishing the Truth. The Divine influence changes the thoughts, the meditation, the speech and the actions of anyone that is truly dead to self and the flesh; who has been born again in Jesus Christ receiving and keeping His new nature.).

 

Most of the current participants of the 'Deeper Life' forum, on the C&MA web site, do not believe that their life can be free from sin, dead to the self-life. If they could only understand the idea of being a living sacrifice; they would not be proud of sinning. They would see that God wants us to be born again and know the power of Christ's sacrifice which frees us from the power of sin and death.

 

Malachi  says that God does not want sick, diseased, crippled, etc. sacrifices.  Paul tells us to be holy, pure before we present ourselves as a living sacrifice.   Romans 12:1 " ... make a decisive dedication of your bodies [presenting all your members and faculties] as a living sacrifice, holy (devoted, consecrated) and well pleasing to God, which is your reasonable (rational, intelligent) service and spiritual worship."

 

 

If we are not presenting ourselves as a blameless, holy sacrifice then we fall under the rebuke of Malachi, making light of God's name.

 

 

Mal 1:6  "A son naturally honors his father and a slave respects his master. If I am your father, where is my honor? If I am your master, where is my respect? The LORD who rules over all asks you this, you priests who make light of my name! But you reply, 'How have we made light of your name?'

Mal 1:7  You are offering improper sacrifices on my altar, yet you ask, 'How have we offended you?' By treating the table of the LORD as if it is of no importance!

Mal 1:8  For when you offer blind animals as a sacrifice, is that not wrong? And when you offer the lame and sick, is that not wrong as well? Indeed, try offering them to your governor! Will he be pleased with you or show you favor?" asks the LORD who rules over all.

Mal 1:9  But now plead for God's favor that he might be gracious to us. "With this kind of offering in your hands, how can he be pleased with you?" asks the LORD who rules over all.

Mal 1:10  "I wish that one of you would close the temple doors, so that you no longer would light useless fires on my altar. I am not pleased with you," says the LORD who rules over all, "and I will no longer accept an offering from you.

Mal 1:11  For from the east to the west my name will be great among the nations. Incense and pure offerings will be offered in my name everywhere, for my name will be great among the nations," says the LORD who rules over all.

Mal 1:12  "But you are profaning it by saying that the table of the Lord is common and its offerings despicable.

Mal 1:13  You also say, 'How tiresome it is.' You turn up your nose at it," says the LORD who rules over all, "and instead bring what is stolen, lame, or sick. You bring these things for an offering! Should I accept this from you?" asks the LORD.

Mal 1:14  "There will be harsh condemnation for the hypocrite** who has a valuable male animal in his flock but vows and sacrifices something inferior to the Lord. For I am a great king," says the LORD who rules over all, "and my name is awesome among the nations."

 

 

**hypocrite,  deceiver H5230 -  A primitive root; to defraud, that is, act treacherously:

 

It is common practice, in the church world today, to treat the blood sacrifice of Jesus Christ as 'common'. Common means that it is not holy, special, sacred; it is something you do every day without any special consideration.  

They will have to give account for their carelessness in regard to Jesus' sacrifice.  People ask forgiveness like they are taking a daily bath after a careless romp through the mud, when they are told over and over to stay away from the mud. Is that not rebellion, something that God compares with witchcraft??

 

Many are quick to quote verses, that they do not understand, as in 1 John chapter 1, but do not read, understand, or live 1 John  chapters 2-5.

 

"...And everyone who has this hope focused on him purifies himself, just as Jesus is pure).    Everyone who practices sin also practices lawlessness; indeed, sin is lawlessness.   And you know that Jesus was revealed to take away sins, and in him there is no sin."

 

"Everyone who resides in him does not sin; everyone who sins has neither seen him nor known him."  1 John 3:3-6

 

 

Malachi 2:17  You have wearied the Lord with your words. Yet you say, In what way have we wearied Him? [You do it when by your actions] you say, Everyone who does evil is good in the sight of the Lord and He delights in them.

 

I do not see any difference between this verse and the belief that I am eternally secure of my eternal life while I live conformed to this world, in sin and disobedience to what I know is good or right.  The idea today is that one lives in sin, but is called good because Jesus is good. That is an offense to God, as I read from the heart or spirit of Malachi and what the Holy Spirit is trying to warn us about through the writings of Malachi.

 

Here is the Noah Webster definition of evil.

 

Evil
E'VIL, a. e'vl. [Heb. to be unjust or injurious, to defraud.]

1. Having bad qualities of a natural kind; mischievous; having qualities which tend to injury, or to produce mischief.

Some evil beast hath devoured him. Gen 37.

2. Having bad qualities of a moral kind; wicked; corrupt; perverse; wrong; as evil thoughts; evil deeds; evil speaking; an evil generation.

3. Unfortunate; unhappy; producing sorrow, distress, injury or calamity; as evil tidings; evil arrows; evil days.

[Tony Davison]

In our church’s we have a spirit of division and disunity we have no vision we have lost our way the Lord told us to go into all the world and preach the gospel not tear each other apart we have become the very Pharisees of the past. Before you start thinking yes that is what this person or that group is doing you better make sure you are not part of the problem first.

N HIS SERVICE

Tony Davison

Below is a quote from the NASB version of the bible  

 

The Pharisees Rebuked

²² Then a demon-possessed man who was blind and mute was brought to ^[v]Jesus, and He healed him, so that the mute man spoke and saw.²³ All the crowds were amazed, and were saying, “This man cannot be the Son of David, can he?” ²⁴ But when the Pharisees heard this, they said, “This man casts out demons only by ^[w]Beelzebul the ruler of the demons.”

²⁵ And knowing their thoughts Jesus said to them, “^[x]Any kingdom divided against itself is laid waste; and ^[y]any city or house divided against itself will not stand. ²⁶ If Satan casts out Satan, he ^[z]is divided against himself; how then will his kingdom stand? ²⁷ If I by ^[aa]Beelzebul cast out demons, by whom do your sons cast them out? For this reason they will be your judges. ²⁸ But if I cast out demons by the Spirit of God, then the kingdom of God has come upon you. ²⁹ Or how can anyone enter the strong man’s house and carry off his property, unless he first binds the strong man? And then he will plunder his house.

The Unpardonable Sin

³⁰ He who is not with Me is against Me; and he who does not gather with Me scatters.

³¹ “Therefore I say to you, any sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven people, but blasphemy against the Spirit shall not be forgiven.³² Whoever ^[ab]speaks a word against the Son of Man, it shall be forgiven him; but whoever ^[ac]speaks against the Holy Spirit, it shall not be forgiven him, either in this age or in the age to come.

[Candice]

True Tony True.

[Jesus_Lolly]

I have been struggling because I have not been able to find a "balanced" Christian group of people. I have been

searching for light and finding darkness. It's not that I had walked away from God. I have been reading my Bible

daily, and I don't drink or smoke, etc. Still, I could not seem to find the light and peace of the past.

 

God mercifully directed me to a Calvary Chapel church. There, I found the right combination (for me). They are

fully committed to following the Lord, and they also believe that God is fully committed to them. Thus, their

committment is not dependent upon what they can do--their confidence is in Christ. As I listened to them, the

light and peace flooded my soul again.

 

In contrast, as I was searching for a church--I saw an advertisement for an Easter service. The advertisement

read: "Come visit our selfie booth!" I hate legalism, but there is really something wrong with that focus! It's about

self! Licentiousness and self-righteousness are BOTH about self.

 

Jesus offered Himself that we all might LIVE. He gave ALL, and we give HIM ALL of our faith and trust.

[Candice]

Hi Lolly,

I'm so happy you found a fellowship in a Calvary Chapel; generally, a very friendly and genuine fellowship and I just got back from vacation where my husband and I enjoyed fellowship at a Calvary Chapel on a beach!    It was simple music, fellowship with only about 20 people, in the Word, no gimmicks to get people there, etc. They feed the homeless on the beach every week before the service.  Calvary Chapels are very much about being in the Word.

 

Selfies.  Yikes.  The gimmicks get to me...anything to get people in the door. 

 

We need others in the body to build us up and we build them up even if it is a couple of people to fellowship with...even here on the forum.

 

Lord, I'm grateful for this good news.

[Jesus_Lolly]

Thank you for the encouragement Candice!

[Tony Davison]

This is confirming what i had mentioned earlier about having no Vision. I shared this at our Prayer meeting tonight it is from Oswald Chambers book My Utmost for His Highest. 

 

Reaching Beyond Our Grasp         May 9

Where there is no revelation [or prophetic vision], the people cast off restraint… —Proverbs 29:18

There is a difference between holding on to a principle and having a vision. A principle does not come from moral inspiration, but a vision does. People who are totally consumed with idealistic principles rarely do anything. A person’s own idea of God and His attributes may actually be used to justify and rationalize his deliberate neglect of his duty. Jonah tried to excuse his disobedience by saying to God, “…I know that You are a gracious and merciful God, slow to anger and abundant in loving-kindness, One who relents from doing harm” (Jonah 4:2). I too may have the right idea of God and His attributes, but that may be the very reason why I do not do my duty. But wherever there is vision, there is also a life of honesty and integrity, because the vision gives me the moral incentive.

Our own idealistic principles may actually lull us into ruin. Examine yourself spiritually to see if you have vision, or only principles.

Ah, but a man’s reach should exceed his grasp,
Or what’s a heaven for?

“Where there is no revelation [or prophetic vision]….” Once we lose sight of God, we begin to be reckless. We cast off certain restraints from activities we know are wrong. We set prayer aside as well and cease having God’s vision in the little things of life. We simply begin to act on our own initiative. If we are eating only out of our own hand, and doing things solely on our own initiative without expecting God to come in, we are on a downward path. We have lost the vision. Is our attitude today an attitude that flows from our vision of God? Are we expecting God to do greater things than He has ever done before? Is there a freshness and a vitality in our spiritual outlook?

WISDOM FROM OSWALD CHAMBERS

Faith never knows where it is being led, but it loves and knows the One Who is leading.  My Utmost for His Highest, March 19, 761 L

 

Taken from My Utmost for His Highest® by Oswald Chambers, edited by James Reimann, © 1992 by Oswald Chambers Publications Assn., Ltd., and used by permission of Discovery House Publishers, Grand Rapids MI 4950l. All rights reserved.

[Jesus_Lolly]

I think what brings freshness is to once again gaze into the face of Jesus:

 

[Jesus_Lolly]

I think my main struggle stems from becoming lax in my committment to Jesus. We live in a world that has turned against biblical principles. I'm not at all interested in fighting with them--for that reason, I've sat down and allowed the world to pass by. I'm also not interested in jumping on some legalistic bandwagon or cause--I just want to return to knowing Jesus intimately. However, He is not One to give Himself away on a deep level if we are still partnering with this world. So, I want to become more like Aristarchus--fulling committed to the Lord and His purpose--even if it costs me everything--including scorn and loss of reputation.

 

Meyer's NT Commentary

Colossians 4:10. Sending of salutations down to Colossians 4:14.

??????????] a Thessalonian, known from Acts 19:29; Acts 20:4; Acts 27:2, Philemon 1:24, was with Paul at Caesarea, when the latter had appealed to the emperor, and travelled with him to Rome, Acts 27:2.

? ????????????? ???] ????? ?????? ??? ???????? ??????, Chrysostom. In the contemporary letter to Philemon at Phlemon Colossians 1:24, the same Aristarchus is enumerated among the ????????; and, on the other hand, at Philemon 1:23 Epaphras, of whose sharing the captivity our Epistle makes no mention (see Colossians 1:7), is designated as ?????????????, so that in Philem. l.c. the ????????????? is expressly distinguished from the mere ????????, and the former is not affirmed of Aristarchus. Hence various interpreters have taken it to refer not to a proper, enforced sharing of the captivity, but to a voluntary one, it being assumed, namely, that friends of the apostle allowed themselves to be temporarily shut up with him in prison, in order to be with him and to minister to him not merely as visitors, but continuously day and night. Comp. Huther, de Wette, and Fritzsche, ad Rom. I. p. xxi. According to this view, such friends changed places from time to time, so that, when the apostle wrote our letter, Aristarchus, and when he wrote that to Philemon, Epaphras, shared his captivity. But such a relation could the less be gathered by the readers from the mere ????????????? (comp. Lucian, As. 27), seeing that Paul himself was a prisoner, and consequently they could not but find in ?????????. simply the entirely similar position of Aristarchus as a ??????????? (Plat Rep. p. 516 C; Thuc. vi. 60. 2), and that as being so at the same time, not, as in Romans 16:7, at some earlier period. Hence we must assume that now Aristarchus, but when the Epistle to Philemon was written, Epaphras, lay in prison at the same time with the apostle,—an imprisonment which is to be regarded as detention for trial, and the change of persons in the case must have had its explanation in circumstances to us unknown but yet, notwithstanding the proximity of the two letters in point of time, sufficiently conceivable. It is to be observed, moreover, that as ??????. always denotes captivity in war (see on Ephesians 4:8; also Luke 4:18), Paul by ???????. sets himself forth as a captive warrior (in the service of Christ). Comp. ????????????, Php 2:25; Philemon 1:2. Hofmann (comp. also on Romans 16:7) is of opinion that we should think “of the war-captive state of one won by Christ from the kingdom of darkness,” so that ????????????? would be an appellation for fellow-Christian; but this is an aberration, which ought least of all to have been put forth in the presence of a letter, which Paul wrote in the very character of a prisoner.

Upon ???????, consobrinus, cousin: Herod, vii. 5, 82, ix. 10; Plat. Legg. xi p. 925 A; Xen. Anab. vii. 8. 9, Tob 7:12, Numbers 36:11; see Andoc. i. 47; Pollux, iii. 28. Not to be confounded either with nephew (??????????) or with?????????, cousin’s son, in the classical writers, ??????? ????. See generally, Lobeck, ad Phryn. p. 506. To take it in a wider sense, like our “kinsman, relative” (so in Hom. Il. ix. 464, who, however, also uses it in the strict sense as in x. 519), there is the less reason, seeing that Paul does not use the word elsewhere. Moreover, as no other Mark at all occurs in the N. T., there is no sufficient ground for the supposition of Hofmann, that Paul had by ? ????. ????. merely wished to signify which Mark he meant Chrysostom and Theophylact already rightly perceived that the relationship with the highly-esteemed Barnabas was designed to redound to the commendation of Mark.