Being led by the Spirit.

Brethren,

One of the subjects we have been discussing of late, is regarding guidance and whether we should be guided by scripture alone or whether we should be listening to the Holy Spirit speaking directly to us, to prevent the deception of our own thoughts leading us astray, or worse, the deception of the enemy who prowls like a lion, seeking whom he can destroy..

My view is that we must put the immediate and present light from the Holy Spirit first and then search the scriptures to confirm it.

I would like to present to you, a man who got it wrong for your consideration. A man who you would expect not to get it so wrong, as he had access to the holy writings of the prophets. The apostle Paul.

In Acts 21:4, God speaks to Paul through disciples who told him not to go to Jerusalem. Paul is not listening to God. He has set his mind and is determined to hasten to Jerusalem but the Holy Spirit had spoken to the others, giving His express will that Paul does not go.

"And finding disciples, we tarried there seven days, who siad to Paul through the Spirit that he should not go to Jerusalem". Literally this means, not to set foot in, not as in Acts 20:23 as a warning of danger, but now, an imperative command.

Perhaps they tarried the seven days due to lengthy discussions in the hopes of persuading Paul not to go. It was not Paul's wish however, that he was delayed. In Ephesus (Acts 18:20) he would not delay and said that he must by ALL means (18:21) go.

He was determined which meant that he was not open to the leadings of the Spirit, so would he change his plans whenever the Holy Spirit would forbid him? It seems not for in Acts 20:16, it is recorded that Paul 'hastened'. "For Paul had determined to sail by Ephesus because he would not spend time in Asia, for he hastened, if it were possible for him to be at Jerusalem for the day of Pentecost".

We cannot hasten if we are being led by the Spirit of God. In fact hastening is a sign that the enemy is at work, for to walk in the light means that every step that we take, must be taken deliberately and carefully according to the minute by minute guidance that living in close communion to Christ brings.

Paul has lost his way and is now driven by his own thoughts, which are not wrong in themselves, after all, his desire was to serve Christ and those who were preaching the gospel. He had not turned aside from his ministry but he had ceased to hear God speaking directly and immediately and when that failed God tried to speak through the disciples. Intention does not count in the kingdom. The road to hell is paved with good intentions. He was playing straight into the hand of the enemy, who more than anything else, wanted to end Paul's missionary journeys and have him imprisoned. In fact that was what happened as you recall.If Paul had thought "Oh I cannot be deceived, I am a child of God" he would be wrong, and so are we.

Paul called the elders at Ephesus to him at Miletus and said his goodbyes to them explaining that he was 'bound in the spirit" (Acts 20:22) which was actually his own spirit whereas in 21:4 it is the Holy Spirit telling Paul not to go.

The final warning came in Cesarea, this time, not in words which had failed so far, but by way iof a physical demonstration which convinced Paul's travelling companions (21:12) so that they and Philip the evangelist, all men of God and led by the Spirit, untied in their immediate and direct discernment that God was commanding Paul not to go. They "besought him not to go".

Christ has said "when two or more are gathered in my name" or are in agreement " there I am in the midst of them" which is sufficient warning to us whenever we decide to go it alone and step outside of the counsel of the brethren.

What was Paul thinking of? His fellow disciples gave up, realising that Paul's mind was set and closed. They ceased (21:14) and could only put the situation in God's hands: "The will of the Lord be done" and resigned themselves to accompanying Paul despite their understanding that it was not God's will and their stubborn brother in Christ was in mortal danger.

You may say "But God used him in prison!". Indeed - God uses every opportunity He can get to use us even if we have stepped outside of close communion with Him.

But note that God did not intervene to stop Paul. He allows us to be deceived and to go our own ways. He has provided all that is necessary for us through the baptism of the Spirit to discern His workings. However sometimes that is not enough. Let us take Paul's example and listen carefully to what God is saying to us.

Hi Brenda, I believe that you are in error with your conclusions. Of course these are just my thoughts but let me explain. Here in the same chapter, Acts 21, we see from Agabus the specific words............

And when he was come unto us, he took Paul's girdle, and bound his own hands and feet, and said, Thus saith the Holy Ghost, So shall the Jews at Jerusalem bind the man that owneth this girdle, and shall deliver him into the hands of the Gentiles. (Act 21:11)

You see, this is the word of knowledge or prophecy from an acknowledged Prophet. Then, in the flesh they add their concerns..........

And when we heard these things, both we, and they of that place, besought him not to go up to Jerusalem. Then Paul answered, What mean ye to weep and to break mine heart? for I am ready not to be bound only, but also to die at Jerusalem for the name of the Lord Jesus. (Act 21:12-13)

You see, the first part was the prophecy and the second part was their fleshly and understandable response to it. Yet Paul, with all the vision and the revelation from God, knew what was in store and that indeed these things would happen but that they were the will of God. Higher and more glorious is the path that denies the flesh and willingly suffers for the cause of Christ. We overcome the enemy by the blood of the lamb and the word of our testimony and this most important part that so many men have resisted down through the ages but a smaller more glorious group have not " and they loved not their lives unto death." These are the heroes of the Church that we read about in the last 2000 years.

Here is Matthew Henry's take on the Scripture you gave sister and you will see that it falls in line for what I have just laid out for Acts 21:11 and gives context to the Scripture that you used as your example. Matthew Henry says of Acts 21:4..............

"3. The disciples at Tyre were endowed with such gifts that they could by the Spirit foretel the troubles Paul would meet with at Jerusalem; for the Holy Ghost witnessed it in every city, Act_20:23. Being a thing that would be so much talked of when it came to pass, God saw fit to have it much prophesied of before, that people's faith, instead of being offended, might be confirmed. And withal they were endowed with such graces that foreseeing his troubles, out of love to him and concern for the church, especially the churches of the Gentiles, that could ill spare him, they begged of him that he would not go up to Jerusalem, for they hoped the decree was conditional: If he go up, he will come into trouble there; as the prediction to David that the men of Keilah will deliver him up (that is, if he venture himself with them); and therefore they said to him, by the Spirit, that he should not go up, because they concluded it would be most for the glory of God that he should continue at liberty; and it was not at all their fault to think so, and consequently to dissuade him; but it was their mistake, for his trial would be for the glory of God and the furtherance of the gospel, and he knew it; and the importunity that was used with him, to dissuade him from it, renders his pious and truly heroic resolution the more illustrious."

We must at all times follow the Spirit and not the flesh dear sister. For as Matthew says, our trials are for the glory of God and we should not be dissauded by the nature of them and finally Matthew concludes that Paul's actions were all the more " pious and truly heroic," and his resolution all " the more illustrious." I am in complete agreement with this and respectively disagree with your premise and conclusions.............bro Frank

Brother Frank

Thank you for taking the time to give me your understanding of these scriptures. I appreciate it. I do know that the established position is as you have said. It was how l used to see it myself.

But l must still respectfully disagree with that interpretation. The vision given to Agabus, was l feel, to be a warning and especially when the others also felt it was out of the will of God for Paul to go.

It was not the usual way for God to graphically show the suffering that lay ahead of His apostles. To me, it could only be a warning but Paul had it in his mind be that he was willing to sacrifice himself. All very well if we are called to do that but l don't think Paul was called to do so on this occasion. Otherwise there would be no warnings nor would the disciples be in agreement with each other and upset that Paul was rejecting their counsel.

Further to this, when he was interrogated, he insulted a priest and then denied that he knew he was speaking to a priest - definitely out of order and a downright lie from the fallen Paul.

No, l am convinced that our dear brother had a fall from grace, like Peter, and which we are all in danger of if we are walking in the light. It matters not what our position is or how high up we are, it is the same, if flesh is allowed any space then down we will go.

After all of the training that Paul went through and his important role in the church , it could not have been God's will for him to die because he went up to Jerusalem. God likes us to stay alive as long as possible when we have become matured but Satan wants to take us out and sometimes succeeds.

Paul suffered ship wrecks and beatings. You are using Eisegesis.

Dear Brenda,

Respectfully, I agree with Frank and others on this one. By the Holy Spirit we can receive warnings for God always warns his people. But a man or a woman who belongs to Christ may choose the more difficult way. The history of the church is replete with such stories.

Think of Bonhoeffer who was warned of danger in staying in Germany during the reign of Hitler.

Or John Harper, a Scottish preacher who was warned by members of his congregation not to take a trip to preach in Chicago in 1912. He spoke something similar to Paul, that he was compelled to go and considered his life worth nothing if only he completed the task the Lotd Jesus had given him.
The ship he boarded was the Titanic and he was valiantly preaching the gospel to the very end when he threw his life vest to a young man who did not know Christ. He laid his life down for many.
A warning from the Holy Spirit or a word of knowledge is not always a mandate that requires obedience. It is a loving and compassionate Word from our Lord to his own precious children that they may choose the difficult way but does not demand it.

Just my thoughts as I pondered the question.

Sis L

Hi Brenda,

Todd gave us Acts 9 which clearly shows that Paul was shown the sufferings that were to come, he had already "seen," it. The man who has been given revelation by God will not be swayed with those who have been given limited revelation. The Holy Spirit gives the measure and we know what kind of measure was given to Paul.

You write.........

"Further to this, when he was interrogated, he insulted a priest and then denied that he knew he was speaking to a priest - definitely out of order and a downright lie from the fallen Paul. No, l am convinced that our dear brother had a fall from grace."

Brenda, that is indeed possible but I think unlikely given all that we know about Paul in it's entirety. Can I give you what I consider to be a more plausible explanation?

And Saul arose from the earth; and when his eyes were opened, he saw no man: but they led him by the hand, and brought him into Damascus. And he was three days without sight, and neither did eat nor drink. (Act 9:8-9)

Ye know how through infirmity of the flesh I preached the gospel unto you at the first. And my temptation which was in my flesh ye despised not, nor rejected; but received me as an angel of God, even as Christ Jesus. Where is then the blessedness ye spake of? for I bear you record, that, if it had been possible, ye would have plucked out your own eyes, and have given them to me. (Gal 4:13-15)

Paul it seems had some terrible problems with his eyes and the Galatians it seems loved him so much that they would have plucked out their own eyes and gave them to him. If one who had such eye problems mistoook who spoke in a crowded noisy room, we could easily understand this. To categorize it as a downright lie from the fallen Paul seems ungenerous Brenda especially when built upon conjecture, we must think the best of our brothers and sisters unless we know things for a fact it seems to me. God bless you............bro Frank

Act 24:16 And herein do I exercise myself, to have always a conscience void of offence toward God, and toward men.

Paul is speaking about his conscience in regard to the matter Brenda spoke of as he stood before the high priest. He had a clear conscience long after the fact. He acknowledged that he caused a rucus when he says this..........

(Act 24:20-21)Or else let these same here say, if they have found any evil doing in me, while I stood before the council, Except it be for this one voice, that I cried standing among them, Touching the resurrection of the dead I am called in question by you this day.

by brenda7 on 2016/7/1 11:38:42

After all of the training that Paul went through and his important role in the church , it could not have been God's will for him to die because he went up to Jerusalem. God likes us to stay alive as long as possible when we have become matured but Satan wants to take us out and sometimes succeeds.

So true, "my people perish for lack of knowledge".

Romans 12:2
And be not conformed to this world: but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind, THAT YE MAY PROVE what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect, WILL OF GOD.

Dear brothers and sisters

Thank you for joining in and commenting.

Can we please leave sexism out of my thread please? It only serves to bring contention. Please start another thread if you wish to discuss this savannah.

You seem to have missed this verse:

21 Submitting yourselves one to another in the fear of God. Ephesians 5:21

I am allowed to discuss whatsoever I wish within the bounds set by the moderator on this forum. It is not a church or a marriage and is open for men and women for expressing our views. It is not your forum and it is not banned either to have another slant on texts, and in fact, theologians are noted for their lack of spirituality so we should not be surprised to find that the conventional view is not held by those who have a deeper knowledge of the ways of God.

Despite what you said, I had an amazing time this morning in the supermarket when the presence of the Lord fell on me and I walked around softly singing the hymn - Lo He comes with clouds descending:

http://www.oremus.org/hymnal/l/l187.html

It is wonderful to be persecuted praise the Lord! Bless you!

Frank brother

I think Paul was refering to what he had said here:

12 And they neither found me in the temple disputing with any man, neither raising up the people, neither in the synagogues, nor in the city:

13 Neither can they prove the things whereof they now accuse me.

So he was answering the previous accusations.

I do know that the convential interpretation is that Paul could not see the high priest. I do not find that plausible. Paul, being a highly intelligent educated man, and a Roman citizen to boot, would have made sure that he was in a position to see and hear all that was said, as he showed himself perfectly able to defend himself.

The earlier incident when he was led because of his temporary blindness has nothing to do with his current problem I believe and his problem seems to have been with the written word which does not necessarily mean that normal seeing was also affected. I think that has been un-neccessarily added in. He was a tentmaker and so needed sufficient eyesight for that.

I also think that he may have been spoken to prior to the trial by the high priest so he would have been familiar with who he was and his position in the courtroom would have shown it too I am sure. No I do not think that it adds up.

I only speak of Paul in this way because I understand the state of sanctification he was in prior to his fall from grace, in not listening to the Holy Spirit. It is something that I am guilty of too.

Ron, I think that his subject is very important and can be of great help to us in our walk.

Sandra, we have to add the warning to what he disciples had been saying and their unity regarding disagreeing with Paul.

Todd:

" I think they saw it as needless waste of this apostle and were right to state their hearts on the matter."

Oh yes agreed. Everyone was against Paul though which is very significant to me. Being a martyr was nothing to be afraid of if it was God's will - they would have been rejoicing for Paul.

Sister Les

Paul was in a rather different position than the saints you mentioned - there were not many of them and Paul's journeys were so important and nobody else could do them probably. To have something happen to such a key worker at this stage would have been deadly to the spread of the gospel. By God's grace it was not. I don't think that it was the most difficult way that Paul chose, it was just at odds with what God had called him for. We are not to seek martyrdom but accept it if it comes.

Tim, Luke recorded what happened without comment on Paul. I don't see that unusual.

Thanks again brethren.

Edit:

This is a very interesting topic and thank you for bringing it up, Brenda. Your first post has some real "pearls" in it and I will isolate them and talk about them, later.

But, in re-reading and studying the different texts, I have questions, I never had before.

I find it strange that God repeatedly warned Paul of what would happen if he went to Jerusalem. Paul was not a dense person by any means. Why did God need to tell Paul the same thing, over and over? God was clearly not warning the Church of Paul's coming sufferings, as the prophecies kept going to Paul not the Church.

Agabus did not go from church to church sharing his warnings about Paul, he only went to Paul. What then was God's purpose in warning Paul time after time after time? In all known instances in the Bible where God has repeatedly warned a man of future consequences related to his conduct and behavior, the purpose was always to stop him. God's purpose in Paul's case is made very clear in Acts 21:4.

Act 21:4 And finding disciples, we tarried there seven days: who said to Paul through the Spirit, that he should not go up to Jerusalem.

All attempts to work around this text that I have read seem to reject the plain meaning of the text.

I don't see any evidence that God ever directed Paul to go to Jerusalem.

In Acts 20:22, was Paul referring to his spirit or the Holy Spirit.

Act 20:22 And now, behold, I go bound in the spirit unto Jerusalem, not knowing the things that shall befall me there:

Is Paul making a distinction between his spirit and the Holy Spirit? Is he (in verse 22) admitting, maybe unwittingly, that he is in bondage to his own desire, or to his own sense of duty.

It looks like to me that Paul's visit to Jerusalem was not for any good purpose and if he heeded the Lord's warnings he would have gone to Rome sooner. He would have preached there as a free man, maybe even stayed longer and gone onto Spain for more fruitful ministry.

Maybe Romans 15:28 was the Lord's true direction for his life. Could he have not fulfilled his true potential because he stepped out of God's will? An important lesson for all of us. Any wrongheaded detour for any of us will always be a setback for the Church.

Rom 15:28 When therefore I have performed this, and have sealed to them this fruit, I will come by you into Spain.

Did Paul present a strong witness to the Sanhedrin while in Jerusalem? No, he embarrassed himself and the gospel by his fleshly outburst against the high priest. Paul had no alternative but to apologize for breaking the law.

I think the scriptures are revealing to us Paul's disobedience and interestingly the scriptures do not reveal anything of his martyrdom so as not to exalt Paul, the disciple. The only hero of the New Testament is Jesus Christ.

The brethren and Paul's friends, finally gave up in trying to change Paul's mind. They accepted that Paul was determined and this was communicated to them in no uncertain terms as Paul's final word on the subject. God had choses to let Paul have his own way, even though He could have stopped him via circumstances or a vision or given him the grace to humble himself and admit his error. But, as in all of our lives, God gives us control over our own life so that we may learn lessons that regrettably can only be learned through disobedience.

This is not new: Paul is not the first to fail God.

1. Abraham lied about Sarah being his sister.
2. Peter failed God in Galatia.
3. Moses failed to enter the Promised Land by demeaning God through an impulsive explosion of anger.
4. David, lusted after Bathsheba. It was said of him that he was the "man after God's own heart".

The list goes on and on. God has a purpose in showing us the weakness, the besetting sin that clings to the best of men. No mere man has ever been turned into a hero. God won't have that. The only hero in the Bible is God. I know it is hard for us to imagine but even the great apostle Paul was imperfect. The chief of sinners was still a sinner.

(Edit: Originally I wrote, "The chief of sinners was still a sinner. This is not correct. Thank you, Brenda for bringing this to my attention. I never refer to saints as sinner so I mispoke on this and it does not convey by thoughts. What I was trying to communicate is that we are all mere men and can get out of God's will, sometimes. Even Paul. Peter got out of God's will in Galatia, yet all of his writings are inspired and trustworthy. David committed adultery yet the Psalms are trustworthy and inspired. Abraham lied about his wife being his sister, Moses sinned and was not allowed into the Promise Land. All of these men got out of God's will, yet God used them to pen a portion of the inspired Scriptures and they were godly men.)

Continuing:
I think the key was that Paul was not content to just bring the gospel to the Gentiles. And some hints of this can be found in Rom. 10:1 and 9:1-3. And I can understand and sympathize with Paul that maybe even dearer to him than the lost gentiles was his own people. He mourned terribly at what awaited those who rejected the Messiah. They were his kin and he knew except for the grace of God he would stand in their place. He was willing to suffer the wrath of God if many Jews could be saved and I think this is what was deep in his heart that undermined him and God knew the only way to bring this out of his heart so he could see and recognize it was to let him have his way. He probably thought God's command to not go was to only spare him further suffering and so he was willing, but as we all see, he did not accomplish anything by casting God's direction through the Church (many witnesses) aside.

Then let us agree to disagree Brenda..........bro Frank

by dolfan on 2016/7/2 14:16:53

Savannah, with all respect, I didn't correct Brenda. We are having a kind discussion, all of us. Brenda is holding her ground in her honest understanding of Scriptures. She has done so sweetly. If she remains convinced of the correctness of her understanding, so be it. It is harmless, so far as I can tell, to her and anyone else. Over all, the Holy Spirit will lead her into all truth as He does for all of us. She has no obligation to us to be persuaded.

I do not want my words, please, to be lifted and pasted in an accusatory way.

Thanks for clarifying for all the readers, dolfan. For me, I did not once believe you were writing in aggression towards Brenda. I really liked your post and thought it was really seasoned with grace and you are right, her view is very plausible and who knows, it could be the Holy Spirit's view?

There are two camps on this issue it seems and it has been around for a while. Respected men of God line up on both sides.