SermonIndex Audio Sermons
Promoting Genuine Biblical Revival.
Looking for free sermon messages?
Sermon Podcast | Audio | Video

Discussion Forum : Articles and Sermons : Late Entry

Print Thread (PDF)

Goto page ( Previous Page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 Next Page )
PosterThread









 Re: Late Entry

The Mercy of The Lord

It isn’t always possible to comprehend what the meaning of something is until it passes into sight. By which time it is of course more than likely too late. Yet with the Lord there is always an opportunity presented in plain sight for anyone to apprehend the thing which is intended. What cannot be done is to “prove” that a thing is of the Lord. It can only be stated and beyond that it cannot be pressed any further. Moreover, it is one thing to hear something and it is another to understand it even when we are hearing the Lord Himself.

The book of 1 Samuel contains a clarity which cannot be ignored because it is stated plainly. The substance of this clarity is simple. If you fail to rebuke your disobedient sons there will be consequences for the whole house. This means consequences for the head of the house and all those under him. What was the thing which Eli’s sons did which necessitated his rebuke? Was it in their childhood? Perhaps when they were little babies? Perhaps Eli which means "My God" simply didn't know that children needed to be disciplined. Perhaps he failed completely and miserably to discipline his children. Perhaps he was just weak minded. Or perhaps he looked out of the land of Israel as High Priest and custodian of the Law of God and just though, hey if anyone brings their rebellious children to me I will just let them off. Or perhaps perhaps perhaps. All speculation and rhetoric.

The explanation begins in 1 Samuel 12:13 in which we are told that Eli’s two sons were worthless men and did not know God nor the custom of the priests before the people. In short they did not know how to behave as priests They despised that portion of the sacrifice which was set unto the Lord [the fat] and which ought to have been consumed by fire. This was for no other reason than because they did not want to eat of the portion which was boiled. They wanted the raw meat before it was consumed by fire so that they could roast it with the fat portion because its is more flavoursome and desirable to the belly. One might ask why did these two priests not comprehend that their desire for the fat as well as the meat, was an offence to the Lord?

Clearly they neither knew the Lord, which 1 Samuel tells us, and clearly they did not comprehend the need in obedience to burn the meat with the fat portion, so as to consume the fat unto the Lord. It is inconceivable that they didn’t actually know the order of events or the requirement, because the servants or young men who went to collect the portion for the priests went precisely, to draw without sight, a “fork” of meat, boiled for consumption by the priests who were not actually present at the sacrifice. The two sons of Eli took their daily food precisely from this method of distribution. First of the fire unto the Lord of the fat portion and thereafter of the pot unto the priests. Something made them incapable of seeing that their actions in sending the young men to bring their portion and instructing them to take the fat portion by means of violence if necessary were the demand resisted, was an offence to the Lord. The something was nothing less than their hearts. How did they harden their hearts?

As priests the very least thing which was required of them was to remain clean unto the Lord in their own bodies. These two sons of Eli were sleeping with prostitutes and then still demanding their daily portion. These same two sons of Eli in the end thought it acceptable to take the Ark of the Covenant into battle, to great shouts of confidence from Israel, against the philistines, and yet they lost 30 thousand men and the Ark was taken into captivity in a single day.

In short they comprehended nothing of their own uncleanness and by taking the Ark they demonstrated their contempt for God and the belief that they themselves could wield the power of God. All in all a very serious condition to be in and a costly mistake for the whole of Israel. Of one of these two sons is come ichabod, a wicked and evil priest.


What would have been the effect or benefit if Eli had rebuked his sons in a timely manner? One thing is for sure when he did rebuke them after the people complained to Eli about their behaviour it was too late. God had already decided to take their lives. After all they were God's priests. It must be clear in reading these things in scripture that by this practise of taking the best portion for themselves, Eli’s sons were acting in a manner which reflected a deeper issue than the outward and visible action. They were in fact men who did not know the Lord, even though they were priests. Yet their father was the high priest and they grew up with the Ark of the Covenant in their sight. By committing sexual sins with prostitutes they made themselves unclean and unfit to serve the Lord of Hosts before the Ark. This underlying attitude led to an even greater attitude of neglecting their priestly duties by reason of their sins and inability to be clean before the Lord. This led directly to the Lord deciding to put these men to death. In fact their deaths were no more than a sign to Eli, concerning the Lord’s words to him directly that He would remove the ephod from his house. To his sons it was the price they paid for their own wickedness. The price Eli paid was living long enough to hear of the Ark of the Covenant being taken in battle by the philistines, to which news specifically he fell off his chair a dead man, no doubt having comprehended momentarily not the loss of his sons, but the cost of his own failure as their father. In the end his house was removed from wearing the ephod and it was given to another man by Solomon more than 100 years later.

It would be ever so easy to spiritualise all of this and fail to comprehend that these men were not little children, they were priests unto God in the place of the Ark of the Covenant. They themselves did not demand the portion which was set aside for God directly they sent their servants to do it and threatened violence if the Lord’s portion was not given to them. Thus they were themselves corrupting the youth who came into the Tabernacle, who themselves would become incapable of comprehending the Lord either. Call me picky but I get the impression these men had an exceptional reason to have sought God with their hearts. They had everything necessary to serve faithfully. Save for one thing. Willing hearts. Eli, despite his mistake in not rebuking his wicked sons sufficiently to vindicate the Lord’s portion, nevertheless was the man who in the end spoke the blessing which gave Hannah her peace and led to the Lord blessing her with her first born son, Samuel. He also blessed Hannah and her husband with a prayer for more children to replace Samuel. God Himself answered both of these prayers in full. On the other hand perhaps Eli just didn’t beat them sufficiently when they were little babies.

And that would be the end of the matter but for Samuel himself. It would be a really great account with all the right ingredients to just so prove that failing to punish and break our children when little, leads to evil and rebellious men in their adult lives. One thing is very definitely true. Eli ought to have disciplined his sons throughly the moment he heard the reports about them sleeping with prostitutes and what the implication for that would have been regarding their ability to minister. In failing in that did Eli, not only receive to himself some of the portion of the fat, which was for the Lord but he failed to put the Lord’s name above His own sons welfare. Not little children, but fully grown men.

Samuel as a child slept in the same room as the Ark of the Covenant. Yet he still did not know God. Verse 3:1 clearly states that Samuel was ministering to the Lord, before Eli. And verse 3:7 clearly shows that at this time Samuel did not know God because God had not yet revealed His word to Samuel. In short Samuel physically lived in the presence of the Ark, he served God, by ministering before the High Priest of God, and yet he did not personally know God.

In all of this Samuel was a child. Yet when the moment came God called his name and he heard the call, yet did not comprehend its true meaning. No one can be deaf when God calls them. They may not understand that it is the Living God, but they cannot but hear Him. God knows how to speak and be heard. Because Samuel was yet a child and reliant in obedience upon Eli to show him the way, Eli was therefore the one who explained what Samuel must do when the Lord called again. Having been instructed, Samuel was able to say “speak for your servant is listening.” on the fourth time of being called. The first thing Samuel heard was confirmation of the word previously spoken to Eli concerning his sons death as a symbol of God’s judgement on the house of Eli, in the removal of the ephod of High Priest.

It is hard to differentiate between what type of man our children will become when they are yet babes. We have such hope in them and when they don’t turn out the way we expect it is easy to blame ourselves, or we can just wait for the accusing finger of our brethren. Either way it is the heart at the end of the day which separates men unto God. And it is the heart which God Himself looks upon when He chooses vessels for honour or dishonour. None of this has to do with life, anymore than having no part in the millennium kingdom is evidence that a man’s name is not written in the Book of Life.

If we then go on to the end of Samuel’s life we see that it was Samuel’s own sons who’s corruption formed the basis for the people of Israel to demand a king, recognising that Samuel was already old and would go to be with the Lord. Imagine that! An obedient Samuel with corrupt sons. If everything in life could be put down to dog training our children then of all people, ought not Eli and Samuel have understood and insured that their children would not have fallen away into wickedness and injustice.

Today we have a better covenant than either Eli, Samuel, David or Solomon had and it is written in the blood of Christ. By this are we and our children able to come into a living relationship with God, yet just as with Samuel, though our children dwell in a righteous house if we do in fact believe, until they hear from God Himself, they will not know Him. What will separate them from God in eternity will be a matter of God Himself looking upon the heart and revealing Himself according to His own knowledge. It is in the end the heart which matters and not the outward obedience to the letter. Being unable to even express ones own mind on a matter or comprehending that the world is an evil system against God in finality, does not make for salvation in our children. It is in the way of children to express themselves. It is in the way of parents to explain what that means and its consequences. It is not necessary to provoke our children's natural distractions from the centrality of our total will, in order to entrap them and thus to punish them for being no more than a child.

I notice that there are some who insists on the rod but neglect to strike a balance in their speech regarding compassion and mercy. I also note that this leads to some extraordinary harsh attitudes towards others and their children, little realising that they are instructing widows and orphans. Does anyone imagine that God will not fulfil His promise that when widows and orphans pray he will hear them. If the whole of this thread is read through and the locked thread as well, I think you will find that no one at all has denied the need for correcting children in any way. It has been shown that the Hebrew word translated as rod in English whilst it is used several hundred times throughout the OT is variously translated tribe, branch staff as well as rod. whilst it is used hundreds of times in a variety of ways it is used only twice to denote an actual physical switch of a tree. And one of these is a branch and not a switch. The sad lament in all of this is a simple one. Those who say beat your children and break them in this post at least also say and "if you don’t you are serving Satan". Its no wonder that we cause unbelievers to stumble when they read such things.

You will find all of the above points clearly set out in 1 Samuel.

Edit Addition

If I have misunderstood or misrepresented the scriptures please say so. I have no difficulty with that. But please say it meaningfully and not anecdotally by posting lovely stories about how grateful children are when we beat them, because we have thereby expiated their guilt. If the scriptures are given for our instruction and training then of course we need to have an accurate understanding of them. Not necessary a dogmatic one.

 2013/6/4 4:00
proudpapa
Member



Joined: 2012/5/13
Posts: 2936


 Re:

Hi amrkelly,

pp asked

Quote:
Who is advocating much beating ??

Not even one post is advocating much beating! To suggest so, is a LIE! a false accusation toward Gods Children. proudpapa



amrkelly response was a quote of Bro Denny Kenaston :///// "I want to say this also: We use this at our house. We use it often at our house. It gets used more on the younger ones than the older ones. But we use it often at our house, and my children love me." "

The Godly Home" a video preaching session by a brother speaking about his own home.////

The brother that you are reffering to is bro Denny Kenaston, the sermons that you are reffering to are promoted by SI, If you trully believe that these sermons are promoting abuse, than do as I asked and take that up with SI ministries.


amrkelly do you have an honesty problem ?

We all make mistakes, myself included, but when men countinuly say one thing and countinuly do the opposite, my respect for their opinion fades more and more every time they do so.

and for that reason more than any other my respect for your opinion is becoming very little.



 2013/6/4 8:00Profile









 Re:

Quote:
amrkelly do you have an honesty problem ?

We all make mistakes, myself included, but when men countinuly say one thing and countinuly do the opposite, my respect for their opinion fades more and more every time they do so.

and for that reason more than any other my respect for your opinion is becoming very little. proudpapa



You will have to explain this question of my honesty to me more plainly. I have no idea what it means.

I presume that those reading these posts are capable of determining for them selves who said what and identifying what the name of an individual attached to a particular sermon may or may not be if the sermon itself is identified by name and corresponds to a relevant post by that name. Still who knows what men may or may not think or comprehend. Thats my most politest assumption as to what your use of the term "honesty" may mean, so unless you explain yourself further it is most likely all I can say as well on that question.

Finally brother I haven't expressed any opinions in these posts. I have expressed matters pertaining to the Law in the UK. Others have expressed how things work in the USA as a matter of reality, and I completely agree with their assessment even though they have been said to be serving the devil in their explanations as well. As to what you or other men think of me is of no consequence to me whatsoever. I thought I had made that reality very clear.

 2013/6/4 8:28
proudpapa
Member



Joined: 2012/5/13
Posts: 2936


 Re:

///You will have to explain this question of my honesty to me more plainly. I have no idea what it means.///

It has nothing to do with this topic, I am reffering to the numerous times in the past year that you have seemingly lost composure and made statements like this : ///Well it is as it is. I am finished./// only to find you once again posting within a short period of time.

To me this much more discredits an individuals influence to me, than does that of an individual because they throw a knife or tomahawk at a target.




 2013/6/9 17:02Profile
Lysa
Member



Joined: 2008/10/25
Posts: 3382
East TN (for now)

 Re: proudpapa

Quote:
proudpapa wrote:
I am finished./// only to find you once again posting within a short period of time.

To me this much more discredits an individuals influence to me, than does that of an individual because they throw a knife or tomahawk at a target.


This is a bunch of baloney (PRETENTIOUS NONSENSE), every single person who posts regularly on here says their leaving only to return!

I've done it! And I believe you've done it as well.


_________________
Lisa

 2013/6/9 19:52Profile









 Re: Leaving the site

Quote:
It has nothing to do with this topic, I am reffering to the numerous times in the past year that you have seemingly lost composure and made statements like this : ///Well it is as it is. I am finished./// only to find you once again posting within a short period of time. proudpapa



Thanks for your clarification. I took a little time to reflect on what you have shared and decided that perhaps a clarification may help to make sense of your comment.

In the last year I have "left" the site three times in the way ordinarily understood by that term. The first was in respect to a young man who used the name TheEphah in which I proudly stood against him and was rebuked by Paul West. In response I took myself off the site. The second time was when I proudly resisted Robert Wurtz II (Moderator) and again decided to leave the site. The third time was when I wrestled a little with Appolus (Frank) and used the term "falling of a cliff" to denote a sense of stumbling. In each of these instances I acted against myself in response to having a wrong attitude to others. I have also occasionally expressed within a particular thread an intention to resist posting into that thread again, and then have posted again. That has been true with regard to http://www.sermonindex.net/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?topic_id=49248&forum=34&9 in which I wisely stated that I would resist posting any further on that subject. Then after a while decided to posts in contradiction to my own recognition that the subject was going to be a difficult on for me to resist and could have easily become contentious.

As Lysa has said many members have done similar things.

I think what matters in regard to this thread which is in effect a continuation of the above link which was eventually locked is what I know to be true myself.

I can tell you that when I have said "I am finished" it is because I partly realise that I ought to finish and partly because I feel I have said something which ought to be more weighty that the responses would suggest was true. In your case brother you have taken this to mean that I won't respond if you once again post material from a particular ministry. So this is what you have done. The effect on me is a simple one. It grieves me, and necessities a response. Perhaps I am wrong in that attitude or belief but that is the singular reality of it.

I could simply repeat what I have said before. I would welcome a response from the inferred ministry or its lawyers and have both the means and the will to resist them in open court in the USA and in the spirit. This is because of a conviction and not because of pride. It is a matter of conviction. I know that you already understand this attitude of mine very well as it has been discussed several times before. To that extent as Lysa said your comment is baloney because that which had gone before already informs the deeper reality of things. No ill feeling intended. I just want to be plain speaking.

 2013/6/10 10:02
jochbaptist
Member



Joined: 2010/11/24
Posts: 262


 Re:

Amrkelly,

I have sometimes wondered whether you might be schizophrenic. Please don't take it as an insult, because it is merely put (and meant) as an observation.

Sometimes I am amazed at your insights, and sometimes at the volatility of your reactions to reasonable posts, where you aggressively attack something that I can't even see that was mentioned. For instance:

------------------------------------------------------
This chap would have been better putting his much education to something useful. It’s frankly incredible that he begins with an issue regarding the discipline of children and end with the words "criminals". In my view that just about sums it up. Shame on such men as these!
--------------------------------------------------------

Someone once described you as "passive aggression cloaked in eloquence" (or something in that vein) after you reacted to their post. I agreed.

I feel that you are sometimes instrumental in turning good posts/topics into confusion with your longwinded, opinionated responses. I get the sense that you are doing this to impress. Sometimes your contributions to a topic, such as the one where you reported on the revival in Wales, were a great blessing to all.

If I could only read as much Scripture as I have to read through your voluminous contributions (to try and make sense of post) ........ but that is what you are forcing those involved in posts to do.

Hope this did not come over in the wrong way, because it was not easy for me to say this.

I think this scripture sums it up pretty well.

Proverbs 10:19.
When there are many words, transgression is unavoidable, But he who restrains his lips is wise.

Joch


_________________
J Kruger

 2013/6/10 15:54Profile









 Re:

Quote:
I have sometimes wondered whether you might be schizophrenic. Please don't take it as an insult, because it is merely put (and meant) as an observation. Jochbaptist




It was in a discussion about home schooling in which you previously told me:

Quote:
And your (AK's = amrkelly) academic and longwinded (it would be very interesting to make a word-count on your contribution to this specific thread) opinions on all you managed to extrapolate from the article, makes me sympathize with the OP, as I too have felt the brunt of reactions to something shared in a desire to participate and offer something that has been of personal value. Posted on 2012/10/9 3:25 in http://www.sermonindex.net/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?topic_id=46942&forum=34&start=30&viewmode=flat&order=0




It was ceedub who said:
Quote:
“I'm sorry, somehow I got into the "Resort to personal slander in a passive -aggressive yet eloquent fashion" blog. I was just hoping to discuss the talents and yet be able to have an opinion at the same time” on 2013/2/22 14:16

in response to my comment to him
Quote:
“Then there is nothing to say is there and your question becomes more like a lion in the thicket who's quiet murmurings are mistook for pain. Then as you draw closely to give some comfort the lion roars and makes good its escape into the night. Oh the fool who mistook the lion in the thicket for pain and saw not the lion who devours”

in the same post http://www.sermonindex.net/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?mode=viewtopic&topic_id=48374&forum=36&start=0&viewmode=flat&order=0


Now I am asked if I have a mental illness. From which question I can perhaps assume that you believe that a symptom of Schizophrenia is evident by a dichotomy of insightfulness on the one hand and seeming aggression on the other. How you could voice such an “observation” and not insult someone is difficult to imagine objectively, but to put your mind at rest I am not offended.

As for the lack of scriptural references and the necessity of searching scriptures yourself to test what I have shared, I can tell you that this is deliberate. I am quiet capable of citing scriptural references but I take the view that the reader will benefit more from making their own effort than by being given chapter and verse by myself. Apart from that the scriptures are living to me and not chapter and verse. Anyone with a good knowledge of scripture will see the “scripture” and no doubt make up their own minds regardless.

As to the question of my confusing posts by reason of asserting those things which you or another cannot see in the originating post is surly a matter of insight and relevance, which at very least may lie in the mind or heart of the originator and therefore cannot be easily seen by others. Only the recipient would be able to establish that.

To which end I wrote the following:

Quote:

This chap would have been better putting his much education to something useful. It’s frankly incredible that he begins with an issue regarding the discipline of children and end with the words "criminals". In my view that just about sums it up. Shame on such men as these!



Which you have cited as an example of my seeming mental illness. Perhaps you ought to read the whole post brother and digest its fuller contents then the context and relevance of something may become apparent.

Well thanks for sharing brother I accept that you have meant well and will give the matter some more thought.

 2013/6/10 16:59
proudpapa
Member



Joined: 2012/5/13
Posts: 2936


 Re:

amrkelly wrote RE: ////In the last year I have "left" the site three times in the way ordinarily understood by that term. The first was in respect to a young man who used the name TheEphah in which I proudly stood against him and was rebuked by Paul West. In response I took myself off the site. The second time was when I proudly resisted Robert Wurtz II (Moderator) and again decided to leave the site. The third time was when I wrestled a little with Appolus (Frank) and used the term "falling of a cliff" to denote a sense of stumbling. In each of these instances I acted against myself in response to having a wrong attitude to others. I have also occasionally expressed within a particular thread an intention to resist posting into that thread again, and then have posted again. That has been true with regard to http://www.sermonindex.net/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?topic_id=49248&forum=34&9 in which I wisely stated that I would resist posting any further on that subject. Then after a while decided to posts in contradiction to my own recognition that the subject was going to be a difficult on for me to resist and could have easily become contentious.///

You forgot this one of which you wrote:

RE:// Public discussions simply don’t make any sense to me at all. I think in the end I will leave and put my time to other things. That can only mean preaching the gospel, I sincerely and truly hope so.//

RE:// I am going to share this simple point and then Im finished. By that I mean I am finished posting on SI altogether.//

RE:// None of this matters. I am in any event finished. Why this should be so, precisely now has more to do with the fact that I am unable to go on due to several posts which I have contributed to of late and which finally and completely convince me that nothing is to be had with so many minds of dissension where even the smallest detail of truth can be argued over as though truth were a matter of opinion. It is better for me to accept that I am unable to contribute any further and that I ought to return to that which produces the better outcome. How I feel about this is also irrelevant. When I am crossing over a precipice and the options before me are likely to lead to my own dissension I would rather cut the rope and fall than stumble others.

http://www.sermonindex.net/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?mode=viewtopic&topic_id=48639&forum=36&start=10&viewmode=flat&order=1









 2013/6/10 22:33Profile









 Re:

Is there a purpose brother to your efforts? If so why don't you state it openly and then it will have a chance to grown healthily. If it grows in the shadows it will be deformed and the fruit bitter.

Don't see my own willingness to strike myself with a rod and miss the cost to others that believe they can strike me at will.

And yes I did forget that one.

Words brother, they carry the power of life and death, and an absence of them does not the meaning veil.

Quote:
RE:// Public discussions simply don’t make any sense to me at all. I think in the end I will leave and put my time to other things. That can only mean preaching the gospel, I sincerely and truly hope so.//

RE:// I am going to share this simple point and then Im finished. By that I mean I am finished posting on SI altogether.//

RE:// None of this matters. I am in any event finished. Why this should be so, precisely now has more to do with the fact that I am unable to go on due to several posts which I have contributed to of late and which finally and completely convince me that nothing is to be had with so many minds of dissension where even the smallest detail of truth can be argued over as though truth were a matter of opinion. It is better for me to accept that I am unable to contribute any further and that I ought to return to that which produces the better outcome. How I feel about this is also irrelevant. When I am crossing over a precipice and the options before me are likely to lead to my own dissension I would rather cut the rope and fall than stumble others.//



As a matter of reality I did stop reading and posting on SI for one month after writing these comments and instead put my time to creating a website in order to state plainly what cannot be stated plainly on this site. In the end brother you will come to comprehend this.

Apart from that, contributing to public discussions does not make any sense to me if it is truth we are after. So many opinions will not make for a sound understanding of anything. I am quiet happy to dwell alone brother. I seek no friends and I require no friends. It is the way of it and this is the man the Lord has made. We would all be better served to find such a satisfaction in the Lord and recognise that being alone is not the same as ignoring others needs. It simply means recognising that it is possible to serve others needs and to ignore your own. By God's grace I lack for nothing in life. Yet before I was found by Christ I lacked even the most basic things. Today, though I have asked for nothing, I have everything, all of which I am willing to share with any man. Compassion is balanced by the ability to stand. It is not a weak thing as some would imagine. Neither is standing, evidence of a lack of compassion. If your confidence is in Christ, who can disturb you? The only thing which can disturb you is yourself.

 2013/6/11 2:51





©2002-2019 SermonIndex.net
Promoting Genuine Biblical Revival.
Privacy Policy