Do You Continue To Go With Jesus?

[Ormly]

"Ye are they which have continued with Me in My temptations." Luke 22:28

It is true that Jesus Christ is with us in our temptations, but are we going with Him in His temptations? [trial-testing]

Many of us cease to go with Jesus from the moment we have an experience of what He can do.Watch when God shifts your circumstances, and see whether you are going with Jesus, or siding with the world, the flesh and the devil. We wear His badge, but are we going with Him? "From that time many of His disciples went back and walked no more with Him."

*We only want Him to fix our problems so we can continue in our own way.

The temptations of Jesus continued throughout His earthly life, and they will continue throughout the life of the Son of God in us. Are we going with Jesus in the life we are living now? We have the idea that we ought to shield ourselves from some of the things God brings round us. Never! God engineers circumstances and whatever they may be like we have to see that we face them while abiding continually with Him in His temptations. They are His temptations, not temptations to us, but temptations to the life of the Son of God in us. The honor of Jesus Christ is at stake in your bodily life. Are you remaining loyal to the Son of God in the things, which beset His life in you?

*His life in us is to be tested until proven we possess it. The world will provide the test. Our allegiance will prove our possession.

Do you continue to go with Jesus? The way lies through Gethsemane, through the city gate, outside the camp; the way lies alone, and the way lies until there is no trace of a footstep left, only the voice, "Follow Me." ...Oswald Chambers 0919.

* Comments mine

Compare: Temptation-Trial-Test


Luke 22.28
.........l
.........là Heb.2.18; 4.15.

Acts 20.1 à Acts 20.3.

James 1.2
.........l
.........là Matt. 5.12; Jas 1.12; 5.11
.........................l
.........................l à 1Peter 1.6 à 2Peter 2.9
.......................................................l
.......................................................là 1Cor. 10.13 à Rev.3.10

James 1.2 à 1Peter 4.12 [1Peter3.17]

Matt.4.7; 16.1; 19.3; 22.18; Mark 8.11; 10.2; 12.15; Luke 4.12; 10.25; 11.16; John 6.16; 8.6; Acts 5.9; 15.10;

1Cor.3.13; 19; 10.9; 1Thess.2.4; 5.21; Jas.1.12; 1 Peter 1.17; 4.12; 1John 4.1; Rev. 2.2; 3.10.

This is only for the truly born again who knows he/she is on a journey within the kingdom of God that leads to Father's house.
Please keep in mind that the test of temptation is a test of choosing the most Spiritually profitable option. It won't be necessarily sin to make the wrong choice. Some choices just won't be as profitable and should reveal to us, by conviction/revelation, where we stand in the progress of completing our journey; what we need to let be consumed by the fire of the Holy Spirit.

Orm

[lee_merrill]

That's true, Ormly...

Philippians 3:10-11 I want to know Christ and the power of his resurrection and the fellowship of sharing in his sufferings, becoming like him in his death, and so, somehow, to attain to the resurrection from the dead.

God bless you,
Lee

[Ormly]

That's true, Ormly...

Philippians 3:10-11 I want to know Christ and the power of his resurrection and the fellowship of sharing in his sufferings, becoming like him in his death, and so, somehow, to attain to the resurrection from the dead.

God bless you,
Lee

Thank you, Lee. Now if some others would get on with the journey and get off this Arm/Calv/syn/mono/LFW endless geanalogy nonsense. There could be somethings of value discussed for Spiritual profit.

God bless you, too
Orm

[GoBahnsen]

Thank you, Lee. Now if some others would get on with the journey and get off this Arm/Calv/syn/mono/LFW endless geanalogy nonsense. There could be somethings of value discussed for Spiritual profit.

God bless you, too
OrmWho of us here is debating the historic "genealogy" issue? Most of us here are Gentiles, so it's irrelevant to us all the more. We are avoiding it because it is fruitless. Some of the Jews got really worked up about the genealogies for reasons to complex to go into here. But we are heeding the instruction of 1Tim and and Titus... and we are avoiding that discussion.
But that doesn't mean we jettison all debate, just because Paul was wearied by one legitmately pointless debate.

There are serious differences in the other list you mentioned. What about the Mormon/Christian debate? Shall we chauk that up to "endless genealogies"? Of course there is a pun involved, since that non Christian cult is wrapped up in endless genealogies.

Yet you still want to debate. You want us to debate what you consider worthy. That's fine, but that doesn't mean our interests of debate are about endless genealogies. Many fine Theologians have given themselves to this debate. It has stood the test of time. It probably is important.

[Ormly]

Who of us here is debating the historic "genealogy" issue? Most of us here are Gentiles, so it's irrelevant to us all the more. We are avoiding it because it is fruitless. Some of the Jews got really worked up about the genealogies for reasons to complex to go into here. But we are heeding the instruction of 1Tim and and Titus... and we are avoiding that discussion.
But that doesn't mean we jettison all debate, just because Paul was wearied by one legitmately pointless debate.

There are serious differences in the other list you mentioned. What about the Mormon/Christian debate? Shall we chauk that up to "endless genealogies"? Of course there is a pun involved, since that non Christian cult is wrapped up in endless genealogies.

Yet you still want to debate. You want us to debate what you consider worthy. That's fine, but that doesn't mean our interests of debate are about endless genealogies. Many fine Theologians have given themselves to this debate. It has stood the test of time. It probably is important.

Ok, I'll rephrase my remark to mean "Gobahnsen's Bildge". How's that? I think that is more to the point anyway. Thanks.

[GoBahnsen]

Ok, I'll rephrase my remark to mean "Gobahnsen's Bildge". How's that? I think that is more to the point anyway. Thanks.How's that? I think it genders strife to put it that way. I think it creates a hostility and shows a contempt for the things I write. Why not just say you disagree? To call my beliefs "bildge" isn't very winsome. If your views are more in line with Scripture, you should want to be winsome with your words. Rather than attack your opponent with a personal insult, thus driving him away from the very truth you want him to embrace.

Sort of like saying "hey come join my "love club", and if you don't join it's because you're a stupid idiot." Right away, others are suspect that your club is about love. Seems a "hate club" would be more fitting.

That isn't to say that we shouldn't ever be offensive. But we should offend with the truth of God's Word, using words of respect. Even if and when we must take strong issue with an opposing view, let's try to do it respectfully, shall we?

[Ormly]

How's that? I think it genders strife to put it that way. I think it creates a hostility and shows a contempt for the things I write. Why not just say you disagree? To call my beliefs "bildge" isn't very winsome. If your views are more in line with Scripture, you should want to be winsome with your words. Rather than attack your opponent with a personal insult, thus driving him away from the very truth you want him to embrace.

Sort of like saying "hey come join my "love club", and if you don't join it's because you're a stupid idiot." Right away, others are suspect that your club is about love. Seems a "hate club" would be more fitting.

That isn't to say that we shouldn't ever be offensive. But we should offend with the truth of God's Word, using words of respect. Even if and when we must take strong issue with an opposing view, let's try to do it respectfully, shall we?

I believe you are an offense to God's word by wrongly appropriating it in a very subjective way that undermines the truth of it.