Seeking Direction (03/19/26)

We have to be careful of looking to a passage such as this as laying down a template for our actions.  And yet, we know that all Scripture is written for our benefit and our edification.  Let us therefore seek to learn what we ought to learn from what is before us, and having learned it, commit to the practice of it as we ought to do.  I start with this point because we must recognize that Luke is giving us a condensed form of events.  He is not there as stenographer to record some critical meeting.  He’s not even working from the minutes as one might expect we would do in trying to reconstruct a decision made somewhere back in the history of our own church.  It is a significant event, and one taken seriously by the gathered group.  But the details are absent.  We don’t know if there were only these two who fit Peter’s requirements, or if there were others who for one reason or another were not put forward.  Perhaps there were others who simply did not feel themselves called to such service.  I think we could safely posit this much.  However it is that these two were arrived at as the candidates for consideration, God was in that process.

We are also not given any further detail as to what their prayers for guidance were like on this occasion.  Was this a lengthy period of prayer?  Was it one praying and the rest listening, as we see, for example, in the pastoral prayers of our church services?  Or was it something longer, more actively participatory, like we used to see on prayer nights?  Was it lengthy enough to have included a period of fasting, as we see on other occasions?  And how long a period of prayer would such fasting suggest?  In sum, there is much that is left unsaid about the occasion.  We have but this summary declaration of the prayer’s purpose, perhaps its culmination.  And that summary, I would suggest, is the most central factor in this whole passage, perhaps even in the larger section that began back in verse 15.  They prayed.  And they prayed to a purpose, the purpose of rightly discerning who it was that God desired to see in this position of authority.

Look at that prayer.  The NASB records it as, “Thou, Lord, who knowest the hearts of all men, show which one of these two Thou hast chosen.”  It goes on, but that’s the focus.  Lord, you know, please show.  As I have indicated, He was already active in the choice of these two as candidates, though I’m not sure that’s the term I should use here.  This isn’t politics, and they’re not competing for the spot.  They are put forward.  I rather like that choice of phrase, also coming from the NASB.  What about him?  Or him?  They were there.  They’ve been with us faithfully throughout.  They didn’t quit when so many walked away.  They aren’t newcomers.  And we’ve had experience of their character, seen how God is working in them.  I see suggestions that both of these men were among the 70 whom Jesus sent out in pairs back in the early days of His ministry, though we cannot, of course, say with certainty that this is so.  But God had, by whatever means, guided the hearts of this group to put these two men forward, and also, to leave the final decision to Him.

I am particularly struck by their addressing of this prayer.  They are not simply describing a particular aspect of God’s omniscience, though that is in fact accomplished by their words.  This is, I believe, a name of God.  He is God Who Knows Men’s Hearts, or we might say, God, the Heart-knower.  It is telling, at least to me, that that whole phrase, ‘who knows the hearts’ is but one word in the Greek, as though it were formed specifically for the occasion of being used as a formulation of God’s name.  This is who You are.  And in that identification of Him there is tacit admission that we don’t know men’s hearts.  We have opinions.  God has knowledge.  And so, particularly in filling so significant an office, there is this heartfelt concern to ensure that the right man is chosen for the job.

Okay.  I’ve said we need to be careful of drawing rules for practice from this brief description of the event.  But it is clear from what we see throughout this book that this was indeed the practice of the Church, not just for this one time need to restore the number of the Apostles, but for all matters of leadership.  As the church grew, it became necessary to have further officers of the church, and we find the Apostles establishing the office of deacon.  And how does that proceed?  Choices were made, men put forward once again, and, “they brought those chosen before the apostles, and after praying, they laid their hands on them” (Ac 6:6).  There’s the inevitable challenge of properly associating pronouns with referents, but I expect that the praying and the laying on of hands both refer to the Apostles, though I suppose either or both actions could apply to the larger gathering.  I’ll focus it on the Apostles on the basis that we see elsewhere that the significance of this laying on of hands seems to have been applied uniquely to them.  That said, we find the practice elsewhere advised to the elders, so it’s not something exclusively Apostolic in nature.

We can go farther along, to the scene in Antioch, where Saul and Silas are being set apart for a particular mission.  They are being sent out to bear the Gospel into new regions, missionaries, if you will, or even apostles in the lower case sense, for they are commissioned by the church and by the church’s Head, and they are given an assignment and a message to deliver.  This is in keeping with the fundamental meaning of the term apostle.  At any rate, on this occasion, we see that the church had entered a period of fasting as well as prayer.  Does this suggest some 30 day marathon fast, such as some seek to implement?  Or was it just skipping one meal?  Perhaps a day?  We don’t know.  We know only that they fasted and they prayed, and when the time of prayer and fasting was complete, they laid hands on those two men and sent them off on mission (Ac 13:3).

We can go farther forward, as Paul, as he has now chosen to be known, and Silas are revisiting various of the churches they have seeded, and what?  “When they had appointed elders in every church, having prayed with fasting, they commended them to the Lord in whom they believed” (Ac 14:23).  Okay, so here we are dealing with that office which stands somewhere between deacon and apostle, and one clearly intended to persist; the office of elder.  It is not the establishing of that office, I don’t think, but it is acknowledgement of its necessity.

Here is something which appears to me to be consistent across all of these examples.  Prayer follows, or if you prefer, comes in the midst of action.  In our present passage, the choice of these two to put forward transpires before prayer.  The men chosen as deacons were already selected before there was prayer.  Paul and Silas appear to have been identified before the prayer and fasting which are brought to our attention, and likewise the elders in those other churches.  Here, there is the unique facet of appealing to God specifically to make the choice between the two men selected.  In these other cases, though, it appears to be more a prayer and fast of commissioning rather than of selecting.  I do not take this to indicate that the initial selection was any less prayerful, but it may have been prayer of a rather different nature.

I want to be careful here, that I am not simply reading my own predilections into the record.  But there is something to be said in favor of the godly man, particularly in matters pertaining to the church body, being guided by the Head of the body in his decision making, even if he is not taking to his knees for hours as he seeks to make a decision.  I honestly don’t believe God expects us to become functionally debilitated and incapable of making any sort of decision until we have some sign from Him as to His choice.  We have Gideon’s example, of course, from the Old Testament, but to my mind, that is not set forth as positive advice, but rather more as showing a touch of spiritual weakness on his part.  After all, he already had the call and the instruction before he started seeking such tangible confirmations from God.  And even when he had received such confirmation, he sought again.  But I do see a trend here that we act, trusting God to direct, and having acted, we continue in prayer, acknowledging the reality that even when we do our best to choose wisely, we are still of finite understanding and quite capable of being duped.  But we serve the Lord Who Knows Men’s Hearts.  And we can be confident that He is able to put an end to any action of ours that runs counter to His will, and to steer us and our actions back onto the right course.

This, to me, is the difference between prayer that betrays a certain lack of faith and prayerlessness that betrays a distinct arrogance.  To become paralyzed until convinced, by whatever mechanism, of God’s answer, is to lay oneself open to manipulation by spiritual powers of deception.  To simply presume that all one’s ideas and decisions are from God is likewise open to such manipulation, or may simply betray a heart not actually committed to pursuing God’s purposes in the first place.  Far be it from us to act on no more than our worldly opinion and then seek that God would bless the result.  But far be it from us, as well, to require signs from Him.  The best course I have learned to date is to act as best one can discern God’s leading, and to submit that action to His approval or correction.  I have no doubt written of it before, but the idea that He is able to close doors we ought not to go through, or to open those which we should, whatever impediments may appear to block our progress should inform our ways.  We were taught some years back of that idea of deo volente, if the Lord wills.  That has a clear scriptural basis, and defines exactly the sort of practice I am speaking of, and which I find reflected in these matters of appointing church officers.  They acted and they prayed.  Even here, with the replacing of Judas, there is something of that, isn’t there?  Here, Lord, are the ones we think might suit.  In showing us Your choice of one of them, there must be the possibility as well of choosing, ‘none of the above.’  It is the simple, yet necessary acknowledgement that we find even Jesus applying in prayer.  “Nevertheless, Thy will, not mine.”

However it is that the mechanics of prayer and thought, action and submission, flesh and spirit interact in bringing about our course of action, it is well that we should recognize that God is in the matter.  If I bring Paul’s case into the picture, we see how great a challenge it was for him to defend his Apostleship.  He could not claim to have been together with the others through those three years in which Jesus trained them.  He may or may not have been physically present to witness the baptism of Jesus, but given that he never suggests any such thing, I would venture he was not.  We cannot even say that he ever saw Jesus dying on the cross, though it would certainly have been a possibility.  We do know from his testimony, that he indeed met the risen Christ, and though blinded by the event, must have known enough of Jesus to be able to recognize that this was indeed who he had met.  We know of his period apart, those three years in the wilderness, which we may surmise were spent learning from Jesus, albeit in a different fashion than these others had learned.  But Paul was rather a different case than these others, wasn’t he?  And he was being prepared for a different mission.  Arguably, he had been being prepared from birth for that mission.  But observe his understanding of his office.  “Through God we have received grace and apostleship” (Ro 1:5a).  He didn’t force his way into office, didn’t demand a place in ministry.  He received it.  If ever there was a man to understand this, it was he!  Called while yet Christ’s enemy, and indeed, while actively in pursuit of crushing Christ’s legacy of believers, and only then commissioned for his true purpose!  What else could he possibly believe about that commission, than that it was an office received, practically thrust upon him?  I don’t see any suggestion that he was given a choice in the matter.  No.  He was commanded.  Go here.  Meet this person.  He will tell you what you are to do.  All of it commanded.  And recall as well the word to Ananias concerning him.  “I will show him how much he must suffer for My name’s sake” (Ac 9:16).  Not an office to be sought, then, nor even to be accepted, but an office received, appointed, required.

All of this is well and good, but unless I take time to bring it into application, it is no more than a mental exercise.  As I see the example of such prayerful, lengthy consideration given to the selection of leaders in the church, I have to confess that I have not been anywhere near so prayerful in considering those put forward to serve as officers of our church, nor to fill various lesser functions in the body.  I would have to say that even as concerns some of my own activities, there has been a failure to pray as I ought.  As concerns those journeys taken to Africa, yes, I do feel I have prayed and pursued the course God set me.  And I am again in something of a quandary as to this year’s trip.  At present, much as I would like to go, I am not convinced that I should.  But God will lead.  As concerns selection of elders?  I don’t feel I have given it the prayer it should have had, and in some instances, I don’t think we as a church body have been given the opportunity for such prayer even when we are inclined to take that time, and that’s a bit disconcerting.

I think that in some ways the experiences of these recent weeks, with all the anxious drama that health issues give rise to, have rather amplified the problem for me.  If everything is reactionary, decisions needed now, then nothing is prayerful about it.  There is only response to perceived emergency, and mistakes are assuredly made.  Time and resources are wasted on things that need not, perhaps ought not to have been done.  Words are said which should not have been said.  Nerves are stretched which did not need to be stretched.  And why?  Because prayer lies forgotten.  Seeking God for direction has been left to the side, and that is entirely unwise.

I wrote in my preparations that I need to be better about seeking God out, and though I added the clause there that this was particularly applicable in matters of ministry, it honestly needs to apply far more generally.  I have become too ready to assume my choices are inherently godly, or, which is to put things more near the truth, that godliness doesn’t even enter into it.  I just choose.  It is one thing to trust God to guide.  It is quite another to dismiss the matter and just act as if with impunity.  But God is involved.  He does direct my steps, and in fairness, I don’t think that alters one least little bit based on my attentiveness to His direction.  The outcome, though.  That might vary rather wildly, I should think, based on whether I am so acting and choosing as seeks to pursue His will, or acting and choosing in such fashion as will lead to a need for discipline.  The final result may remain unchanged, but one course is likely to prove far more gladsome than the other.

Well, Lord, You know exactly how needy I am at present, and not just at present, certainly, but always.  Still, so much is crashing in lately, so many decisions that need making, so many changes that need making, so much persistence that needs steadfast determination, and so much bullheadedness on my part which may be mistaken for persistence.  I need You so much, and I call upon You so little.  And even in that I need You.  Lord, You know the needed changes.  You know the needed guidance.  You know the stubborn flesh.  I pray that You would soften my heart to respond as I should, would tamp down my pride, no, rather eradicate it, that I might humbly seek to pursue Your direction.  Help me, my God, and so work in me that I will in fact receive Your help.  Grant me grace in these present trials, and wisdom to navigate.  Help me to love as I should, to guide as I should, to follow as I should.  But help me.  I need You.

Recognizing Authority (03/20/26)

What we see in this passage, and in those others we have considered, is that we ought to be prayerful in reaching decisions in regard to ministry matters.  Yes, this expands to encompass all of life and practice, but I want to focus things back in on the sort of decision being pursued in this passage.  There is a gap in the leadership, and a gap which, by the light of Scripture, ought not to pertain.  We may wonder at Peter’s exposition of those Psalms he quoted in the previous section.  We might question his exegesis and application.  But in the end, I think we must conclude that his exposition is sound, and why?  Is it because he’s such a scholar?  No, but because he is one appointed by Christ Himself to serve as guide and shepherd to the Church.  More, he is appointed by Christ as an Apostle, one who bears the authorized message of the Gospel.  Further, the Holy Spirit, guiding and directing the authoring of Scripture, has seen fit to include this explanation of necessity from Peter without criticism.  He’s right.  There was a hole left by Judas which is not to remain empty, but must, of necessity, be filled by another.

The whole group there gathered is also quite right to commit the choice of his replacement to prayer, and furthermore, to a process unbiased by opinions and feelings, left wholly to the will of God.  I expect using what seems to us no more than a game of chance to discern the will of God hits many of us as frivolous, even superstitious.  And given its widespread us by pagan cultures of the time, I think we would have to accept that so far as motives go, it oftentimes is just that, frivolous superstition.  There is a reason why the Church has generally viewed gambling as at the least unprofitable, if not exactly sinful.  Of course, we have also seen a willingness to allow things like bingo, which is really no different.  A game of chance, though; the whole idea of it is that skill, physical strength, or any other human influence will not, cannot control the outcome.  But if these things do not control, what does?  Chance?  Chance, as we must come to understand, has no power.  It is nothing.  It is not a driver, but an interpretation of result, at best a description of process left uncontrolled.  But in the end, whether we use means firmly guided by the hand of man, or means intentionally stripped of any such guidance, the decision, the result comes of the Lord, Who directs and controls all things.

I can hear the voices of past acquaintance, warning that this slides too near to pagan ideas of fate.  But those ideas are nothing more than a misunderstanding of the Truth, a lie seeking to divert the mind from approaching full understanding.  I’ve observed this in other regards, and I think it applies here as well.  The trappings of false religion are most often quite intentionally kept close to the tenets of true religion.  The practices of pagans were not orthogonally opposed to Christian practice, or Mosaic practice before that.  Far more reasonable to expect that the Devil, in seeking to corrupt and misguide the Church and thus strike back at God, will ape the real, keep things close to the true model, only injecting his error in such a fashion as will most likely succeed in escaping our notice until its corrupting work is achieved.  The idea that the church at its low point, as worldliness crept in and sought to corrupt, intentionally modeled its edifices on the example of Babylonian structures, rather than as appealing to the rather lengthy instructions found in Scripture for the structure of tabernacle and temple misses something critical.  Those Babylonian structures were influenced by an enemy quite familiar with the true form, and intending to mislead.  He cannot mislead by presenting something entirely at odds with the real, else he could fool no one but those already blind to truth.

So it is with pagan conceptions of fate.  They recognize an underlying truth that is indeed true.  God is in control, and every aspect of the created order is in fact proceeding as He purposes.  The seemingly chance occurrences that litter our days are not in fact chance occurrences.  To return to that point so firmly impressed upon me even in the course of my conversion, there is no such thing as circumstance.  There is only purpose.  Things don’t just happen to happen.  They happen to the furtherance of God’s good and perfect ends.  This can be hard to hold onto at times.  When life gets painful, when things seem constantly to be going against us, when everything hurts and it seems there is no relief, we may come to wonder if God is in fact in control.  I could imagine those Christians in Iran or in other nations overrun by Muslim forces might well wonder, as they see family and friends abused, tormented, tortured, and killed, could wonder if God does in fact have things under control, even whether He actually loves them.  But Scripture is replete with assurances that these things are no evidence of His abandonment or displeasure.  Rather they are the innate reaction of darkness against the revealing purity of light.  And all that is clearly unjust in life will in the end be made right.  His good shall prevail, and all that man intended for evil will be found to have been driven and directed to end in a good, even wondrous result.  This does not render their evil less evil.  But it holds the believer firm.  There is a plan and a purpose, and the assurance of Scripture is that even these things will be found to have been turned to our good, who love God and are called by Him, chosen by Him (Ro 8:28).

Back to our passage.  In the life of the church this becomes critical to our understanding.  I could say it will serve well to be mindful that it also applies in matters of politics, but I’ll just leave that there for you to consider on your own.  The sum of it is this:  Leadership comes by God’s appointing.  This is especially so in matters of Church leadership.  It is not an office to be sought, a merit badge of sorts about which we can boast as if we have somehow shown ourselves worthy of the honor.  I can tell you from experience and from awareness of others who have served as faithful elders, that any sense of being worthy, deserving of office, are rather disqualifying for the candidate, and if they somehow accompany the elder entering into the office, they will soon enough be stripped away by the necessity of dealing with things well outside our capacity.  There is a weightiness to being charged with managing God’s mission and God’s people.  I don’t suppose every man ever to serve has felt it, else we would not find the need to reform so often.  But the wise elder knows this full well.  This is an office that cannot be filled well or properly except by strong and constant appeal to God for wisdom and steadfastness.

There are several quick points to make in regard to this.  First, as a lay person, a citizen of God’s kingdom, we must recognize that whatever we may think of the individuals set in this position, leadership comes by God’s appointing.  Whatever the process, whatever its result, this holds true.  If God has thus seen fit to appoint, it behooves us to honor His decision.  Does this preclude bad men coming into office?  No, but if they do, we must yet recognize that God’s hand has been involved.  We must therefore seek to understand, by appeal to the Spirit and to Scripture, why it is that such a choice has been determined as necessary for our good, and what our right response should be.  Spirit-led self-inspection is likely in order, and a determined repentance from whatever may thereby be revealed.  Clear direction from Him as to what should or should not be done as regards this questionable leader must be sought, and followed.  Scripture does give us guidance here, not least in observing the case of David, clearly appointed to replace Saul and yet ever and always unwilling to lay hands on the man, knowing that God, for whatever reason, had appointed Him.  If He appoints, it’s up to Him to remove, and woe to the man who would take it in hand to affect such removal by his own actions.

Second point.  God chooses as one fully aware of the individual chosen, and of his most well-guarded, internal motivations and reasonings.  He is God the Heart-knower.  He is intimately familiar with our most secret thoughts, our desires, our intentions.  If there is anything askew in us, even if we have hidden such corruption from ourselves, He knows.  It is thus eminently reasonable to leave the final choice in His hands.  It’s easy, I suppose, to see that this has been done in the casting of lots, given its intentional removal of opportunity for human influence to produce its result.  It’s harder to see it in the sort of voting we do.  But I observe that we are careful to retain the privacy of the vote.  This is especially so in the case of selecting elders for the church.  Votes are private and as anonymous as can reasonably be achieved.  In this, we pray and trust that each individual is guided in his or her vote by prayerful consideration.  But even if such consideration has not been duly given the choice, we trust God has moved upon them, our Spirit-led fellows, to vote as they do.  The decision is His, and He knows whom He wants.  He is fully and entirely able to direct the choice, by whatever means it is made.

Third point.  He chooses for Himself.  “Show which You have chosen.”  What is Your preference?  We have sought to perceive Your desire and put forward those we believe to suit Your purpose, but in truth, we are still guessing.  You know.  You choose.  But I want to focus on that aspect of, ‘for oneself.’  It is for our good, yes, but it is fundamentally for His intentions, for His purpose, and in that, we can proceed to say that it is fundamentally for His glory.  Beloved, recognize that this was so in His choice of you to believe.  His gift of faith to you is indeed a great, incomparable good for you, and you benefit greatly by it.  But at base, it’s not about you.  It’s about demonstrating His glory.  Your inclusion into the family of God isn’t about you.  It’s about demonstrating and magnifying His glory.  Should He choose to use you in some fashion in the furtherance of His kingdom, whether in leadership or in service, whether in great ways or small, it’s not about you.  It’s about His glory.  It’s about making His goodness and majesty known.

Final point for this portion.  The minister does not in the same fashion choose for himself.  You cannot appoint yourself into position, nor take to yourself what is not given.  You must accept what is given.  The best we might say is that we ought not to refuse what is given.  I don’t know as I want to enter into a battle regarding what degree of choice is truly available when God has chosen already.  Is it theoretically possible that one could receive the call to ministry and refuse it?  I suppose so.  You can try, anyway.  We see Moses do exactly that.  But I would observe that his refusal didn’t alter the case.  He remained appointed and in the end fulfilled the office.  There is a corollary point to recognize here.  We are talking about ministerial positions, and the one appointed as minister or elder or other such leadership role does well to recognize this.  We serve as executing another’s commands.  We serve not to pursue our own ends or our own fame, but to fulfill the commands given by God.  It is His church.  Officers of the Church are by His appointing and thus appointed to serve His intended purpose.

I will just extend this to encompass the whole of His body once more.  We are each of us appointed to our place in the body.  Go back to 1Corinthians and Paul’s use of that imagery.  We have our place, our function.  It will not do to be jealous of another’s function, or seeking to do that for which we have not been appointed and equipped.  It certainly won’t do to serve in the life of the Church as promoting our own interests, or seeking to make a name for ourselves.  That way lies the sin of Adam.  Far be it from us!  But let us learn to be content in the purpose God has given us, ready to grow as He gives growth, but content in the place He has set us.  Let this guide us in all matters!  To be content is blessing indeed, and it comes only by the gift of the Spirit.  But it is a gift well worth pursuing, and exercising to the full when given.  And in all things, let us see how we may serve in accordance with His good and perfect will, as edifying one another rather than vying with one another.  Let those who would lead well be servant of all.  Let us all seek to excel in this being servant of all.

God in the Ordinary (03/21/26)

I want to come back to the matter of methods.  We get these hyper-spiritualized ideas of what it means to know God’s leading.  We want angels appearing to inform us of His decision, voices from the clouds, something unmistakably divine by which we can be certain.  And yet, as I review the Scriptures what I find is that when God’s people were provided with such signs it did not lead to comforting certainty, but to fear.  And we’re not talking that proper, reverential attitude in regard to God.  They were more likely to fall on their faces, fearing for their lives, if it was angels come to announce a decision.  Or, look to the people of God at Mount Sinai when He was so manifestly present and speaking to them.  Never again, please!  This is too much.  We’re scared.

Understand something.  It wasn’t that angel or God Himself were displaying anger towards those they visited.  It was simply the presence of true holiness.  Something in fallen man recognizes, however much we try to hide it from ourselves, that we are dreadfully unholy.  We can go most of our lives not particularly concerned about that, because frankly, everything around us is much the same, so we fit in pretty well.  But bring alongside true holiness?  There is a power in holiness, power to destroy sin.  And, like Peter in the boat with Jesus, when holiness appears, when our sinfulness is exposed to our own perceptions, the natural response is, “Depart from me, for I am a sinful man.”  It may, if God is moving upon the heart, reflect concern lest our corruption somehow touch Him.  It may, more likely does, reflect concern lest we be destroyed of an instant.  Sin cannot withstand holiness.

And here we discover something truly marvelous.  For the one whom God has called, this is not instant eradication.  It is in fact the hope of life.  For God is able to destroy our sinfulness without destroying us entirely.  To be clear, the assurance of perishing for the unrepentant, devoted sinner makes plain that He is equally able to destroy utterly, and in such fashion that the destruction never ends.  But for those upon whom He has, of His own determination and desire, had mercy, this encounter with holiness produces godliness and life.  It is, from our perspective, a slow, even life-long work.  But the delicacy of the operation requires it.  Yet, from God’s perspective, it was finished in that moment of the cross.  I cannot speak of it as brief, for it must have been lengthy indeed from Jesus’ perspective.  Call it three days.  But three days of a sort never to be repeated, and thankfully, never to be personally experienced by us.  How gracious, how merciful is our Father!

Okay, this was not a direction I expected to take here, but it lays a certain groundwork for where I am going.  We are unlikely to get these sorts of awe-inducing display from God as we seek to make decisions and understand direction.  Far more likely, His guidance will come in ways seemingly mundane.  Think of Elijah as he sought the Lord while hiding away from Ahab.  The Lord was passing before him where he hid on the mountain, and hurricane winds tore rocks from the mountain, “but the LORD was not in the wind.”  The earth quaked at His presence, “but the LORD was not in the earthquake.”  Fire broke out, “but the LORD was not in the fire.”  All of these signs and wonders, but the LORD was not to be found in them.  No, there came after all that a still small voice.  “What are you doing here, Elijah?”  (1Ki 19:11-13).  And even this, such a clear signal as hearing the voice of God whispering in our mind, is a vanishingly rare occurrence.  I know one or two occasions in my experience when I could clearly sense His prompting, but really, only once when I could say I recognized His thoughts intruding upon my own, and that was in the experience leading to my conversion, when He spoke His proposition for a test of His reality.  More often, we will find God working in the ordinary.

We are not called to lay out fleeces, to seek signs.  Indeed, Jesus had a rather negative reaction to sign seekers, didn’t He?  You have Me, already.  You have the evidence.  What need for signs?  Of course, in those instances the claims of seeking signs were in reality attempts to find cause for unbelief.  But if you’re seeking cause for unbelief, truth is, you are already firm in unbelief.  Your need for convincing proof lies in the fact that somewhere in there, you recognize your unbelief is baseless, but you refuse to let it go.  If that’s you, I pray God may yet find it to His liking to bring light into your heart, that unbelief may flee and true faith and understanding arise.

But I am more in mind of believers at present, seeking to discern a course of action, a next step, perhaps.  Maybe it’s matters of church leadership.  Maybe it’s finding one’s place and function in the body.  Maybe it’s a call to ministry.  Or maybe it’s simply seeking to be the husband, the wife, the parent, the child, the citizen God has designed you to be.  How are we to discern where God is leading?  Well, I suppose there are simple measures one can take.  If one course is obviously sinful, and the other not, the decision is plain.  But then, in such a case, I would hope we were not suffering doubts as to which way we should go.  Here before us we have a case laid out with two options, both equally acceptable.  We have two men, so far as we are told equally qualified to take on the responsibilities of Apostleship.  But there can only be one.

Can I pause on that for just a moment?  The number of the Apostles was clearly fixed at twelve.  There was no option for expanding their number, as we occasionally hear noised about in regard to the Supreme Court, for instance.  There is a fixed constitution in place to guide the Church, and fundamental to that constitution is that there is one and only one Head, and by His appointing, twelve and only twelve Apostles.  And it’s not twelve alive and breathing at any given time, though we do find two cases of replacement in the duration of the Apostolic age.  No, it is twelve and that’s an end of it.  No preparations are undertaken to see the office maintained beyond the lifespan of these twelve.  Elders are appointed, pastors established, but as to Apostles?  No.  There are twelve.  They complete their work of establishing the Church upon a firm and unchanging foundation, and the office is fulfilled and complete.

Back to our scene.  We are filling the number, restoring what has been eaten away in the departure of Judas, ‘to his own place.’  How to decide?  We can’t play favorites.  And frankly, as the prayers of the saints make plain, it’s not our place to choose.  As I said before, we have opinions.  But God has knowledge.  Lord, You choose.  And so, we come to this scene in verse 26.  They drew lots for them, as the NASB puts it.  But it would more appropriately translate that they gave lots.  And this describes the normal mode of seeking direction at the time.  Each man had some marker, similar to that of the other, but sufficiently unique as to be identified.  It could have been as easy as two stones of similar size but different color.  It could have been small sticks with some unique feature to distinguish.  It could have been, I suppose, some sort of token one carried with them, though that seems a bit unlikely to me.  At any rate, these items would be given to a third party, who collected them in an urn, or a hat, or whatever other handy container, and this one would shake the container, eyes averted so as to remove opportunity to guide the result, until one marker fell out and hit the ground.  And this was considered the decision.

You can think of any number of similar approaches in modern life.  You could look to the coin toss that decides which team starts with possession of the ball in football or other like sports.  You could think of a raffle, with all the tickets in one basket, and the blind hand selecting one to win.  We used to have the idea of drawing bits of straw, the longest, or perhaps the shortest, indicating the choice.  That may be where the NASB takes its choice of words from.  We still know what it means to have come up with the short straw.  It generally indicates onerous duty, but assigned in such a way as proves no malice or bias in the assignment.

Now, we have seen that such practice was common not only to Israel but throughout civilization.  The Roman guards cast lots to decide who got what from the meager possessions of the condemned.  The twelve tribes cast lots to decide who got what plot of land in Canaan.  We saw the case of Saul casting lots to discern who had violated the oath he had made his army take.  And we see just how binding the result was seen to be in that even when the result pointed to his own son (and pointed accurately, we must recall), he would stand by the result; though it meant killing Jonathan.  An unwise degree of commitment, in that case, but to his vow, rather than to the outcome of the lot.  Urim and Thummin, it seems were of the same nature, something to be cast as a means of discerning God’s choice.

Today we incline to write the whole thing off as random chance.  But again, there really is no such thing as random chance.  The most random of events yet follows a determined course.  Its randomness merely reflects our inability to perceive that course, or how it is determined.  There’s a whole section of science dedicated to this very point, trying to sift mathematical formulae out of the apparent chaos.  So, you get these things like attempts to explain how a particular butterfly flapping its wings in the Amazon has led to a hurricane somewhere else.  I can recall a book my father had which I loved reading from in my youth.  It was a book of curious data.  I recall one of the facts conveyed in that book was that if a fly lands on the rail of an ocean liner it causes definable displacement.  So small a thing, so ‘random’ an occurrence, and seemingly unconnected a result, and yet it is there.  That may not be the best illustration of my point, but it’s what comes to mind this morning.  The point is simply this.  “The lot is cast in the lap, but its every decision is from the LORD” (Pr 16:33).  That’s the understanding which leads to the practice.  That’s what lies behind such means of choice, whether it’s acknowledged or not.  For in truth, the decision of the LORD is the determining formula.

Thus, as Fausset’s Encyclopedia observes, this casting of lots to establish a decision was not a form of gambling.  The same act, I would say, may very well have been a form of gambling amongst those soldiers, or others both outside and inside Israel.  The corruption of understanding does not alter the fundamental truth, though.  God is in control.  The use of it to discern His will requires that this is so, and as such we find, as here, submission to the result as submission to God.  He is the arbiter by which the lot falls as it does.

This brings us back to what has been a foundational principle for me from the outset.  There is no such thing as coincidence.  That’s the reality.  If God is in control, there can be no coincidence.  Now, I confess there are plentiful occasions whereupon I will still account things merely coincidence.  There are many times I would prefer to think things merely coincidental.  But truth does not give way to my preferences or my accounting.  Truth remains true.  Coincidence is but shorthand for things whose cause we do not fully understand.  But we should, as believers, understand sufficient to know that even the most coincidental of events has cause, and the cause is ever and always down to God.  There is no why has this happened to which we can arrive at a different first cause.  Even as we contemplate such things as why Adam sinned, or how Satan fell, we must in the end arrive back at the will of God.  And yet, because He is perfect in holiness, we must recognize that somehow, though we cannot fathom the means, He is the cause even of this without Himself being sinful or the author of sin.  No, I cannot begin to explain how this can be.  Yes, I must hold that it is so.  And God is not ashamed to say as much.  Hear it from Him!  “The One forming light and creating darkness, the One causing well-being and creating calamity; I am the LORD who does all these” (Isa 45:7).

So, lay hold of this first principle.  There is no such thing as coincidence.  It is a word with no reality behind it.  This, as it took me years to discover, is the fundamental concept of God’s Providence.  He reigns and rules over all.  The whole of Creation is His workmanship, from the grandest of systems to the least, sub-microscopic particle, and He continuously orchestrates the whole, down to the minutest detail.  Everything proceeds according to His determined purpose and schedule.  It is thus that He can speak of having chosen us from before the beginning.  Before the universe was, you were known to Him.  Before the universe was, the time and place of your birth was known, the time and cause of your death was known, the whole arc of your life, with all its encounters, all its successes and failures, every last breath you would ever take, every word you would ever speak, every thought you would ever think; all of it was known, determined, decreed.

Grasp this reality, and you begin to understand how it is that such a mundane thing as a stone falling out of an urn remains guided by the will of the Lord.  Everything.  Your decision of what to eat this week, when to go to the grocery store, which piece of meat you choose, which line you find yourself in, the car that cuts you off or perhaps lets you in as you make your way there and back again:  All of it is in His hands.  All of it has purpose.  That’s the stunning part, and also the part which gives me great comfort.  All of it has purpose.  And it is His purpose.  And He is good.  And His promise to me and to you is that all of it is being worked to good for us who love Him, and are called because He purposed to call us (Ro 8:28).

You know, that verse has been central to me since I first took time to truly examine that book.  But if anything, it is more central this year, as so much is happening both in the world at large, and in my life personally.  I look at the events that led to me going for an MRI last week, and will lead to me visiting with my doctor to see what comes next this Monday.  I think even more of the health issues and trials my beloved wife is dealing with.  I see all of this accumulating even as pressures at work mount, as decisions regarding retirement loom.  It comes near to breaking us both.  But there remains the solid rock of God’s assurance, of God in control, of all things somehow, though I assure you it’s quite impossible for me to see it at present, work for good for us.  For I know beyond doubt that we are called of God, and I know beyond doubt that we love Him, never so much as we ought, but far more than we could had He not so moved upon our hearts and souls to make it so.

So, rest in the assurance that He is at work in the ordinary.  Don’t become a seeker of signs, but seek wisdom.  Seek to recognize His leading in your life.  It doesn’t need chills and ecstatic expressions to demonstrate His involvement.  It doesn’t need, surely, letting the Bible fall open in hopes of some randomly seen verse indicating direction.  It may well be that we will find God so orchestrating our ordinary pursuits that such a verse comes before us for seemingly unrelated reasons.  But that’s back to the still small voice, in my opinion.  I’m not seeking signs, but by God’s grace I am able to perceive His answer when it is given.  And I have the Holy Spirit indwelling.  Assuredly, He is able to shape and guide my thinking so as to choose the right course of action on any given day.  Yes, I am still entirely too capable of dismissing that guidance and choosing to stray for a time.  But He will not suffer me to continue in errant behavior.  Discipline will come, and loving correction.  And I, by the Spirit’s tutelage, will recognize it for what it is, and be chastened by it.

Settle on this point.  God does not leave things to chance.  It’s true in the Church.  It’s true in the individual.  It’s true in the grand arcs of history.  It’s true in the minutia of daily life in the individual.  And, if this is true, then we must be mindful of God’s intimate involvement in every detail.  Here is a place for humble acceptance.  We may not like the way this vote or that turns out.  We may wonder at His choice of leaders, whether we are talking in the church or in government.  We may question, at times, why He has put us together with this partner, why He gave us the children He did, why He permitted us to have children at all.  We may find His choice of circumstance bewildering, even discouraging.  And yet, He is in it, and He loves us.  It is for our good, and we do well to seek that we might focus on discerning the goodness of God even in these hard providences, rather than remaining laser-focused on the pain and difficulty.  Here is basis to be anxious for nothing (Php 4:6).  By all means, let your requests be known to God.  May as well.  He knows anyway.  But do so with thanksgiving, knowing that however He chooses to answer, it is not just for our good, but for our best.  God never settles for good enough.  He has no reason to.

Alright.  One last observation to close this study, this coming once again from Fausset’s Encyclopedia.  They observe that, while the casting of lots is such a common occurrence from the days of the Old Testament right through to this scene, from this point forward you find no further mention of any such means of seeking God’s direction.  Henceforth, it is prayer and fasting, and there is good reason for this.  Henceforth, the Church operates having received the Holy Spirit.  Every believer has received the Holy Spirit.  Had they not, they would not believe.  They could not.  God chooses, and it is.  God speaks and it cannot be otherwise.  To our present point, we need not turn to so-called games of chance now to discern God’s instruction.  We have the Holy Spirit.  He speaks to conscience, guides our thoughts along proper courses.  It may not even be a still small voice occasion anymore, just the sense of what is right, and the humility to seek that He would steer us clear if we have misunderstood or mistaken our own opinions for His guidance.

Lord, help us to think as You would have us to think, to act as You would have us to act.  Help us to be freed of any taint of pride, walking humbly together with You as You have desired, loving what You love, pursuing what You pursue.  Grant us peace and grace to abide present trials, strength to remain steadfast, and confidence in Your good purpose, Your abounding, abiding love for us.  Grant us awareness as well of our abiding love for You, and the assurance that we shall, in due course, be wholly satisfied when we abide evermore in Your presence.  Strengthen us to stand, and to stand in love.