"When Ye Come Together"
A. McShane
"Strange Things"
Hector Alves
Haggai's Teaching Today
H. F. Norman
Jonathan
Jim Ronald
True Spirituality
E. A. Toll
By A. McSHANE
1 Corinthians 11:17-34
Having considered the subjects of Fellowship (ch. 10:16-23) and Headship (ch. 11:1-16), we now propose to deal with the equally important subject of Worship. As already pointed out in a former paper, the coming together of saints to remember the Lord in the breaking of bread, is the central topic of this portion of 1 Corinthians which deals with local collective testimony. While it must be conceded that Scripture never specifically states it to be a worship meeting, most will agree that this is pre-eminently what it is. The one occasion above all others when our hearts respond with adoring gratitude to the love of Christ is when we are gathered at His table. Indeed, our nearest experiences of Heaven upon earth have been when assembled thus. Anything that contributes to the making of these heavenly times more precious ought, therefore, to be valuable. Experience shows that if saints are kept in a worshipful condition many other matters will require less attention.
The fact that Paul had received a SPECIAL COMMUNICATION concerning this ordinance, at once stamps it with great importance. His being absent from its institution by the Lord left him at a disadvantage compared with the other apostles. When his baptism was in question, Ananias commanded him to have it done, but no such human channel conveyed to him the details of the Supper. “I have received of the Lord” are words which clearly imply that he had his information from Him by direct revelation. When an assembly meets to carry out this ordinance, therefore, it does so in fulfilment of the Lord’s own instructions, and unless there is a legitimate reason in the sight of God, no one in fellowship should be absent from His table. Those who allow trifling matters to keep them away evince the coldness of their hearts, or the absence of life in their souls.
It is important that the remembrance meeting should be preserved from all traces of SOCIAL DISTINCTION. At Corinth, the rich had divided from the poor and had brought about conditions under which it became impossible to remember the Lord. “Have ye not houses to eat and drink in?” is the question put to those who showed no regard for their needy brethren. Home matters and assembly matters should be kept far apart. Many things which are lawful at home ought to have no place in church life, and those who introduce them cause endless trouble amongst the saints. For example, some Christians feel free to have music in their homes, but this liberty is no licence for introducing it into the assembly. Others are happy about playing with children at home, but amusing or entertaining children is no part of an assembly’s responsibility. It is to be feared that some assemblies go to excess in the sums of the Lord’s money they spend upon social work amongst the young. Of these and many other matters introduced into some assemblies as normal activities, the same question applies—“Have ye not houses” in which to do such and such? “or despise ye the church of God?”
The SOLEMN INAUGURATION of the Supper by our Lord in the upper room was in bold contrast to the revelry and lightness in the Corinthian assembly. On that memorable night His mind and heart must have been filled with thoughts of His approaching sufferings and death. Even with their limited knowledge of what was involved, those few disciples, like their Master, felt the seriousness of the situation. Should not each subsequent celebration of the Supper, therefore, be characterised by a similar sobriety, and the emblems be partaken under, as it were, the very shadow of the cross? What can be more out of place at the Lord’s table than worldly display and fleshly ostentation ?
The SIMPLE CELEBRATION outlined in these verses, as in the Gospels, is also in striking contrast to the elaborate ritual associated with the Supper in many religious quarters. In such places its sublime simplicity has disappeared uader a cloud of ceremony, copied from heathen and Jewish practices. No reference is here or elsewhere in Scripture made to anyone officiating. No particular individual is blamed for the disorders at Corinth, nor is anyone asked to take charge and see that all is put right, as would have been done had there been a presiding minister. It is indeed well that the incidental details of the meeting have not been filled in, for it would have resulted in spiritual exercise disappearing and stereotyped formality taking its place.
One fact is made unmistakably plain in the passage, namely, that the primary purpose of our coming together is to remember the Lord and His death. Whatever each one contributes should direct to this end. Whether it be the giving of thanks to God, the reading of a Scripture, or the singing of a hymn, all should centre around the Person and work of Christ. Thoughts of the Saviour rather than of salvation ought to fill our hearts. Reference has already been made to another principle which is also clear in the passage, namely, that it is an occasion for thanksgiving. The words, “When He had given thanks” (ch. 11:24) and “the cup of blessing which we bless” (ch. 10 : 16), imply that gratitude and praise are keynotes of this meeting. There is great need in most assemblies to-day for brethren who can lift the saints into the conscious presence of God by pouring forth in His ear the fulness of their hearts. Often instead of this spirit of worship it happens that some brother attempts to give thanks, but after a few words begins to pray, as though he were in a prayer-meeting. In this, as in other dealings with God, we must guard against “strange fire,” and see to it that our hearts are in tune with our words.
There is in the Supper a SPECIFIC PROCLAMATION to the world of the Lord’s death, as well as a commemoration of His love to us. His rejecters would fain forget the foul deed of Calvary, but those whose hearts have been won to Him, in partaking of the symbols of His body and blood, silently preach to all onlookers the great fact that their Lord has died. They publicly and freely own that all they have, or hope to have, rests upon His finished work.
SELF-EXAMINATION is the necessary preparation for all who participate in the Lord’s Supper. This scrutiny of ourselves should be done prior to our coming to the table. The confession of sin and failure, the judging of the flesh, and the chastening of the spirit are healthy exercises which not only make us fit to eat the emblems, but cause us to value all the more the perfections of the One we gather to remember. The Corinthian believers had neglected this matter, and had fallen under God’s judgment as a result. Let us remember that He is still holy, and will not permit His people to partake of the emblems as if they were eating a common meal. Some, alas, instead of examining themselves and eating the Supper, examine others and stay away.
The three words, “till He come," suggest that we eat and drink in SWEET ANTICIPATION of that future day of glory. The bread and wine will give place to Himself. The little meeting-room, with its few believers, will be exchanged for the countless multitudes and the Home above. Those precious times at His table are foretastes of the meeting from which the saints will never again depart to face the reproach of a cold and Christless world. Thus our eating is prospective as well as retrospective. Little wonder that when the apostle has ended his remarks in these chapters upon the coming together of the local church, he proceeds in ch. 15 to speak of the bright mom of resurrection — the meeting in the air of all the redeemed. Till then may the Lord preserve us true to Himself and in fellowship with His people, so that we may still enjoy a seat at His table.
By Mr. HECTOR ALVES, Vancouver, Canada
From the “strange woman” there emanates “strange doctrine”; this in turn begets “strange children.” When these “strange children” get into the assembly we may be sure that “strange fire” will be offered the Lord. This is very solemn. At least three times we have mention made in the Scriptures of this awful act of Nadab and Abihu, with its solemn consequences. We do well to take warning from it. In Psalm 93:5 we read, “Holiness becometh thine house, O Lord, for ever.” The assembly is the place where God's honor dwelleth; but to-day we see things done in some assemblies that one would expect to find only in the systems around us, where they do not profess to try to rid themselves of “strange children,” but where the wheat and the tares are seen growing together. Even in many of the so-called “churches” there is a reverence, at least outwardly, that one fails to find in some of our gatherings. Sobriety and the fear of the Lord, the atmosphere of heaven, these are things sadly lacking when we gather together on the Lord’s Day morning. The fact that we are in the very presence of the Lord in our worship meeting is something that seemingly is not entered into by many. New things are being introduced, patterns of “Damascus altars,” and forms and ceremonies that are altogether foreign to the doctrine as we have been taught from the Scriptures, are finding their way in amongst us. Some of these things might be spoken of as “the offering of strange fire before the Lord.” Let us see to it that in spite of all these “strange things” that we see around us, we “continue steadfastly in the apostles’ doctrine,” lest we through “strange doctrine,” and “strange children,” introduce “strange fire” into our gatherings. To meet the desires of the carnal and the world-minded, many things are being brought in that a few years ago would have been abhorred by us, and put down as belonging to Babylon, and altogether alien to the pattern as given us in the Word of God. Let us keep in the old paths, and beware that we offer no “strange fire” before the Lord.
Last of all I would draw your attention to this word in Jude, “going after strange flesh.” It comes in connection with the “certain men who crept in unawares.” So again we have the working of these “strange children.” If the offering of “strange fire” would speak of their activities in the assembly, then this going after “strange flesh” might speak of their activities in the world — worldliness. If there ever was a time when the words of James 4 : 4 needed to be brought before us, it is to-day. “Ye adulterers and adultresses, know ye not that the friendship of the world is enmity with God?” It is the “strange children” who in a special way love the world and the things of the world. It is in their very nature to go after things that are foreign to the Scriptures—“strange things”; feeding upon the world’s husks rather than upon the things of God. The exhortation to the true children of God is, “Love not the world, neither the things that are in the world ; if any man love the world, the love of the Father is not in him” (1 John 2:15).
May the Lord help us then to beware of these “strange things — the “strange woman” from whom emanates “strange doctrine,” begetting “strange children,” who offer “strange fire,” and go after “strange flesh.” The virtuous woman with her sound doctrine brings forth true children, who worship God in the spirit and “adorn the doctrine of God our Saviour in all things.”
(Concluded)
By Mr. H. F. NORMAN, Portsmouth
Without doubt the most wonderful event in the history of Israel, subsequent to their redemption from Egypt, was Jehovah’s announcement of His desire to dwell among them. It was not left to Moses, however, although a man to whom God had spoken “face to face, as a man speaketh unto his friend,” to elaborate the plan of this dwelling, any more than it was left to David, “man after God’s heart” that he was, to design the Temple, the house of more permanent character in a later day. The pattern down to its smallest detail was given by Him who was to occupy the house. Not one contribution of human ingenuity or design was permitted to the holiest of men in the fashion, the fittings, or the furniture of the structure that was to be the habitation of a thrice-holy God. Indeed Moses was strictly enjoined, “look that thou make it after the pattern which was showed thee in the mount.” This he did, with the result that Jehovah dwelt in the midst of His people with attendant blessing and prosperity to them. Thereafter we find their blessing and prosperity waxed and waned according to their consciousness of the Lord’s presence and their attitude to His house.
The teaching of Haggai in this respect is most relevant to conditions that obtain to-day in Christendom, and particularly amongst those companies of the Lord’s people who have light on the glorious truth of the assembly. Solemn thought: the greater the light, the greater is our responsibility. The house of God now, of course, has a different character from what it once had. God no longer dwells in “houses made with hands.” The “patterns of things in the heavens” have given way to the heavenly things themselves, and the house is now a spiritual building of spiritual materials (Eph. 2:19-22). Paul's reason lor writing his first letter to Timothy was, “that thou mayest know how thou oughtest to behave thyself in the house of God, which is the assembly of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth” (1 Tim. 3:15). Divine principles once established, hold good and demand recognition for all time, and the same meticulous attention to the pattern of the house in our day, as revealed in the New Testament is as necessary a condition of blessing and spiritual prosperity as it was in a past economy.
God’s ways regarding the house in Haggai’s day are His ways (“He who changeth not”) in our day, despite the changed character of the dwelling.
The people of God then were experiencing lean times, times of poverty and want, with a marked absence of those good things they should have been enjoying (ch. 1:6,10,11). At the very time—-the Feast of Tabernacles (ch. 2:1) — when they ought to have been bringing “their tithes into the storehouse,” filling the oil vats and the winepress, there was, alas, no fruit for their labours, no reward for their toil. “They looked for much, and lo it came to little.” The Lord Himself, anticipating the query in their hearts, asks “Why?” in order Himself to give the answer, “Because of Mine house that is waste and ye run every man to his house” (ch. 1:9). We have stated in this verse a divine principle that gives a lucid explanation of spiritual conditions to-day. How often do we hear lamented the lack of blessing! Few souls are saved ; there is a dearth of the Spirit’s power and activity — “We look for much, and lo it come to little.” Clearly this is because of the house that lieth waste, while we run each to our own houses. When the assembly, God’s highest thought and chief interest on earth becomes ours also, when we regard the local assembly of the saints in its right place in our affections and lives, then, and only then, shall we see spiritual blessing and prosperity. The assembly is intended by the Lord to be the centre of our activities and interests, where we gather as a privileged company to His Name and Person. When it occupies a large place in our affections, our “own houses,” earthly interests, pursuits and pleasures, legitimate as they may seem, being subordinated to its interests, true revival will be experienced. Alas, in most cases to-day, “all seek their own and not the things of Jesus Christ.” Let us earnestly “consider our ways” and seek to be conformed to our great Exemplar Himself, who could say. “The zeal of Thy house hath eaten me up.” There is much zealous activity to-day, but often it is “zeal not according to knowledge,” and corresponds to “putting our wages into a bag with holes.” True spiritual zeal is consistent with Scripture and finds its expression and object in the house, the assembly, and in its upbuilding.
We may see the place God’s house of a future day will have in His thoughts and purposes when from ch. 2:6,7 we learn that He will shake mightily the whole universe in order to fill it with glory. Such a final shaking is yet to come, and come it will, in connection with the apocalyptic cataclysms. Such is the unparalleled dignity and infinite greatness of that sphere of Divine manifestation and government — God’s house. Would to God that in these days of declension we might all be in the line of His thoughts concerning the assembly. His present dwelling-place, and have that interest in it, appreciation of it, and desire to build it. as fellow-labourers with Him, that “God will take pleasure in it and be glorified.” As soon as we take the ground of hearkening to the Lord, as did the people in Haggai 1:12, there will be the glad response from His heart—“I am with you.”
Clearly the key to spiritual blessing and prosperity for us is our practical recognition of the character and purpose of the assembly. In Ezekiel’s day, when the nation was departing from the pathway of obedience, God’s way to their conscience was, not by reminding His people of their redemption, of past blessings, or of present position, but by instructing the prophet to “Show the house to the house of Israel, that they may be ashamed of their iniquities, and let them measure the pattern” (Ezek. 43:10). Oh, that there were to-day more “shewing of the house” by faithful men — men with deep convictions of the place it occupies in the Divine plan, purpose and affection, and the place it should also occupy in our hearts. Then assuredly our association with the Lord will be that “we take sweet counsel together, and walk unto the house of God in company.”
By Mr. JIM RONALD, Portage la Prairie
In the person of Jonathan (1 Sam. 18:3) we have a beautiful picture of the young Christian. He is moved first by a realisation of what had taken place, then by a yielding in affection to Him to Whom he owes his very all.
Consider what had happened. In chapter 17 Jonathan’s only outlook was death. Israel’s forty days of testing ended with the evening’s cry, “Give me a man.” What could Jonathan do? Surely the point of extremity had been reached. Then almost from the unknown, God’s man appeared. He was despised and rejected, yet undismayed. “Was it not laid upon me?” (J.N.D.) we hear him say. Without recounting the details, we know what followed. “The Lord wrought a great salvation for all Israel” (ch. 19:5). and in celebrating the victory the women sang, “Saul hath slain his thousands, and David his ten thousands” (ch. 18:7).
Jonathan saw and heard it all, and he was profoundly moved. “The soul of Jonathan was knit with the soul of David, and Jonathan loved him as his own soul” (ch. 18:1). That love must express itself in action. So beloved Jonathan stripped himself and handed all as a thank-offering to the one to whom he owed so much — robe, garments, sword, bow, and girdle. David had stripped himself for Jonathan (ch. 17 : 39), now Jonathan strips himself for David. David's weapons had been five smooth stones; now Jonathan presents to him five handsome gifts.
Dear reader, has not this a voice for us ? We, by faith, have seen One “stripping Himself of the insignia of His Majesty” (Phil. 2:7, Lightfoot) for our sakes. What is our response? Surely
So Paul must have felt, for in the next chapter (Phil. 3:7,8) he strips himself out of devotion to his adorable Lord. “What things,” he says, “were gain to me. those I counted loss for Christ. Yea doubtless, and I count all things but loss for the excellency of the knowledge of Christ Jesus my Lord : for whom I have suffered the loss of all things, and do count them but dung, that I may win Christ.”
Now, let us return in thought to Jonathan. Is there not a spiritual significance in each gift he laid at David’s feet ? The robe is that of royalty another is owned as king. The garments speak of righteousness. Compare Phil. 3:9, “Not having mine own righteousness ... but the righteousness which is of God by faith.” The sword suggests conflict. The handing over of this weapon which had fought so valiantly in the cause of the man in the flesh (ch. 13:3,4) is the token of full surrender. The bow — used from ancient times to satisfy fleshly desires (Gen. 27:3) — must go, too. While the girdle — symbol of strength — is also yielded up. What a change all of this meant to Jonathan! And, O Christian, what a transformation true devotion to our heavenly David will mean to thee!
In the subsequent chapters of 1 Sam., Jonathan’s love for David arose still higher. He confessed him before others (eh. 19:4); he “delighted much in David” (ch. 19:2); he expressed a willingness to do “whatsoever he desired” (ch. 20:4); he was much displeased when shame was done to David (ch. 20:34); and “went to him into the wood, and strengthened his hand in God” (ch. 23:16).
It seemed indeed that there was no length to which Jonathan’s love for David would not lead him, and in all this what important spiritual lessons the exercised Christian may learn ! Yet, as a matter of fact, this devoted soul failed to go all the way with David. In chap. 20:42 “Jonathan went into the city”; in chap. 23:18 “David abode in the wood, and Jonathan went to his house.” This makes sad reading, when one recalls Jonathan’s earlier devotion. Saul’s son preferred the popularity of “the city” and the comfort of “his house” to the reproach and shame of being associated with the anointed, but rejected, king of God’s choice. The fellowship of David's suffering Jonathan did not share, consequently when the reigning time came he was absent. “If we suffer, we shall also reign with Him" (2 Tim. 2:12). That Jonathan sincerely desired to share in David’s rule we know from his own words (ch. 23 : 17). His turning aside from the path of reproach, however, led to his taking again the sword in the cause of the wrong man, and in the battle which ensued Jonathan fell mortally wounded (ch. 31:2). Poor Jonathan! Is he not a picture of many a Christian? He who had desired to head the list of those who ruled under royal David (“I shall be next unto thee,” ch. 23:17), headed, alas, the list of those who fell fighting for David’s enemy — Saul (ch. 31:2). What a sad end for such a lovely character ! The popularity of the city, the comfort of his home, and the influence of natural ties proved to be too great a temptation for the devoted Jonathan. He went a long distance, but not the whole way, with David. “If any man come to Me, and hate not his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot be My disciple” (Luke 14:26).
By Mr. E. A. TOLL, Newport, Mon.
What, then, are the distinctive features of true spirituality? How can the really Christ-like person be recognised? For, while these are not convertible terms, it must be acknowledged that a believer cannot be said to be spiritual who does not display the moral features of his Lord, even as a believer who is not spiritual cannot be said to be Christ-like.
The first thing it seems necessary to say is that true spirituality can be produced only by the Holy Spirit. The “spiritual” ones of Gal. 6:1 are surely those who “walk in the Spirit” according to Gal. 5:18; that is to say, they take every step of their course “in”— in subjection to — in dependence upon — in the enabling power of — the Holy Spirit. They acknowledge that they “crucified the flesh (the whole, not part of it) with its affections and lusts” (Gal. 5:24), and live consistently with this by seeking to gratify only Spirit-created desires and aspirations, and to express only Spirit-formed emotions.
They apprehend that “the flesh (every part of it) cannot please God,” and that “the mind of the flesh (in the believer as well as in the unbeliever—and whether educated or cultured or not) is enmity against God” (Rom. 8:7) and they therefore seek the mind of the Spirit about everything—their own private affairs as well as those of the assembly, and vice-versa.
They accept the verdict of the Lord Jesus that “the flesh (in any of its forms and phases) profiteth nothing” (John 6 : 63), and in agreement with the Apostle Paul have “no confidence in the flesh” (Phil. 3:3), being determined like him, even as God is determined, that “no flesh (noble or ignoble, refined or coarse, sweet or sour, efficient or inefficient, trained or untrained, wise or unwise, musical or unmusical) shall glory in His presence.” They, therefore, give no place to mere human competence — natural or acquired — in themselves or others — but count upon the wisdom and sufficiency of God, Who choses to use the foolish, weak, base and despised things of the world to the securing of His own glory (1 Cor. 1:28,29).
From this it follows that a believer cannot be spiritual in parts and on occasions. If he is not spiritual in everything he is not spiritual in anything. If he is not spiritual all the time he is not spiritual at any time. This is not to say that he will never err or fail, but it does mean that he cannot decline to be governed by the Spirit in one part of his life and then enjoy His guidance and enabling in another. The believer who refuses to conduct his business in subjection to the Holy Spirit cannot be spiritual in “the work of the Lord.” The believer who does not behave spiritually on a bus or in a shop or at home cannot be spiritual in the assembly. This is why a brother must “conduct his own house well” before being entrusted by the Lord with the care of “the assembly of God.” It is also true that if he is not spiritual in the assembly he will not be spiritual in any sphere. It means that if any part of his life is characterised by unspirituality, then he himself is not spiritual, and however much he may at times conform outwardly to the ways of the spiritual man. he is not to be regarded as spiritual. The thorns on the bush are evidence that the grape-like produce is not the fruit of the vine. Subjected to this test, is it any wonder there is so little evidence of spirituality in assembly activities to-day? How can those who are ready to accept (or even seek) and occupy positions of worldly honour and influence, or engage in political activities be expected to be spiritual in the assembly? How can believers in business partnerships with unbelievers, or in other positions in which they are “unequally yoked,” be relied upon to act spiritually as to the assembly? How can a person who is ready to resort to every device short of actual dishonesty (if he stops at that), in order to advance his business interests, be expected to have spiritual ideas as to the business of the Lord? How can the believer whose home bears every mark of self-indulgence — not to say fleshly gratification — and whose personal appearance evidences self-esteem and ostentation in the style and expensiveness of his or her dress and the wearing of gold and jewellery — be looked to for spiritual guidance in the work of the Lord? How can the golf-playing, cricket-loving, football-enthusiastic, and even boxing-interested brother, or the one who enjoys the wireless and television, be capable of sound spiritual judgment in any matter, although the writer is sadly aware that by many to-day these and kindred features are not regarded as marks of unspirituality at all?
Let it not be thought that the writer is seeking to impose rules of conduct upon the saints. We simply ask, “Are these things the result of ‘walking in the Spirit'? Do they flow out of being ‘filled with the Spirit’ ” ? And yet all such things can and do go hand-in-hand with the pleasant smile and kindly word and hearty handshake, as well as with great zeal and much activity in what purports to be the work of the Lord.
The writer knew well a brother whose practice it was to stand at the door of the hall and shake hands with the saints as they left the meeting, always with a bright smile and pleasant (if spiritually empty) little word. But on a number of occasions that brother locked his wife and family (who were also in the assembly) out of the house all night and not infrequently went for weeks without speaking a word to any of them, except to rail at them. Could that man, even though he was (and remained) “on the oversight” give spiritual guidance to the assembly? Must it not be manifest that spirituality cannot be possessed or expressed by one who is characteristically and habitually displaying the flesh either in its fairer forms or uglier features? so that when the affairs of an assembly are in the hands of such they cannot be conducted in a spiritual way.
It is worthy of note that of the twenty-four times the apostle Paul employs the adjective “spiritual” (and he is the only New Testament writer who uses the word at all, except for two instances by Peter), he uses it fifteen times in the first epistle to the assembly of God at Corinth. Outside that epistle he applies it to persons only once, and even then in connection with recovery to the assembly. Ch. 14 : 37 is specially significant as affording both an example and a test of true spirituality. The words are, “If any man think himself to be ... spiritual, let him acknowledge that the things that I write unto you are the commandments of the Lord.” The import of these words is clear, viz. that the truly spiritual man — the man whose mind and heart and will are really under the government of the Holy Spirit — will, as soon as he knows them — acknowledge the contents of these chapters to be “the commandments of the Lord” and set about obeying them. He will recognise the suitability and fitness of the regulation which these chapters contain for the ordering of the assembly of God in which God Himself is to be present (ch. 14:25) and the Holy Spirit Himself is sovereign to operate (ch. 12:11), and where love according to God is to pervade all (ch. 13). He will realise and own that any other principles are entirely out of keeping with such wondrous conditions, and that to introduce them is not only to violate “the Lord’s commandments,” but to prove oneself unspiritual.
It is not so very long since a leading brother in an assembly not miles from where this is being written declared publicly in the assembly that 1 Cor. 14 has no application to-day, and that it is dangerous to suggest that it applies even in principle. As far as the writer knows, that public statement has never been repudiated by the other leading men in the assembly or withdrawn by the brother who made it. By that statement alone the brother brands himself as unspiritual, although he can smile pleasantly, talk graciously, and show some interest in certain phases of what he calls the work of the Lord.
Of course there are few who would be bold enough to make such an unequivocal public statement (at any rate while still presuming to remain in the assembly), but can it be denied that the Lord’s commandments of 1 Cor. are more often honoured in the breach than in the observance?
The violations of these commandments are too various and too frequent, and oftentimes too deliberate and blatant, to need particularising here, and it would take up too much space and many of them have been alluded to in earlier issues of “Assembly Testimony.” But do those who contravene these regulations for the assembly realise that this very fact stamps them as unspiritual? Gifted they may be, even as the Corinthians (1 Cor. 1:5-7), but like the Corinthians they are carnal (1 Cor. 3:1-3), for gift is no guarantee of, or substitute for, spirituality. Zeal and energy they may have, and a great desire to advance the work of the Lord, but those who strive to do this along lines that are at variance with these “commandments” cannot escape a charge of carnality.
Then why are these matters treated with such indifference to-day? How light-heartedly (and in some cases almost defiantly) things are introduced into the assembly which in no way conform to these commandments. It is not long since it was said in an assembly, “We have so many things already in the assembly for which there is no scriptural authority that another one will not matter.” How often, too, we hear such expressions as, “Of course they don’t meet as we do,” as if it was not of the slightest consequence whether these commandments are observed or not — as if it were merely a matter of personal taste or opinion as to whether we are in an assembly of God or not. It is to be feared that even with some who are in the assembly this is just what it is. so it is not to be wondered at that they do not see the implications of much that goes on.
But the test remains. “They that are spiritual.” because they are spiritual, will instinctively approve the contents of 1 Cor. 11-14 as the only appropriate regulations for the gatherings of the assembly of God, and because they are “the commandments of the Lord” will not seek excuses for evading or modifying or circumventing them. On the contrary, the unspiritual will not, because they cannot, even as they do not. conform to the teaching of these chapters. True it is that some may attempt, for tradition’s sake, or some other such reason, to carry out these principles (for such is the arrogance of the flesh that it may well think itself equal even to this), but they will surely fail, and presently even the attempt will be given up las it is being given up) and new ideas more appropriate to the flesh will be tried. So the unspiritual will manifest themselves to be what they really are, for “they that are spiritual” cannot fail to approve the Lord’s commandments.
Drunkenness is a symptom of carnality, so is immorality, and of these all true believers will be ashamed. Departure from and disobedience to "the commandments of the Lord” in 1 Cor. 11-14 is likewise evidence of carnality. Why, then, are we not ashamed? Why do we not blush before our God that the flesh — the same evil flesh from which drunkenness and immorality spring — is not only tolerated but encouraged and even gloried in in some assemblies to-day? True, it often has a pleasant smile, a hearty laugh, and gentlemanly manners; it is refined (sometimes) and even pious, but it is still the flesh — its wisdom, its foresight, its business acumen, its planning and organising capabilities, its academical achievements, its oratorical abilities, its singing and musical accomplishments, not to say its powers of entertainment. For just as Saul long ago spared the best of Amalek and dared to excuse it on the plea that it was to be offered in sacrifice to Jehovah, so the best of the flesh is spared to-day to aid the work of the Lord, or more truly, to carry it on. But how is it known to be the flesh? Because it does not conform to the teaching of 1 Cor. 11-14. This one fact identifies it.
"They that are spiritual,” who think with God and act with God, and in dependence upon God (and this is the very essence of spirituality, 1 Cor. 2:12-16, Gal. 6:1), will not, cannot, act at variance with, or apart from, the Word of God. This one feature identifies them and marks them also as being like their Lord who “humbled Himself and became obedient even unto death, and that the death of the cross,” and obedience, it should be remembered, is not doing what I think will or should please God, but doing what He has declared in His Word to be His will — and only that.