THREE YEARS IN ARABIA

Three Years in Arabia...(Acts 9:1-19 & Galatians 1: 11- 2: 2)
       
     Just after the conversion of the Apostle Paul on the road to damas-
cus,  and the restoration of  his sight,  he is known to have spent three 
years  in Arabia.  This was three years away from  the influence of the 
 apostles, church leaders, and others,  regarding his faith  in the Lord. 
It must  have been  during this time  the Lord  framed  Paul’s  view of 
his  newly found faith in Christ.  At the time of  his re-entry into life in 
Jerusalem and church  leaders,  it was not long before he experienced 
controversy over  the basic doctrines of  the church  and  their  role in  
the life of believing  gentiles.   It  seems the apostles were having diffi-
culty  knowing just what should be expected of  gentile, or non-Jewish,
 believers.  The  Apostle  Peter  was  confused on  the issue, displaying
it in, apparent, hypocritical behavior.  The Apostle Paul, with superior 
knowledge of Judaism and his stint in the desert, faced him down.  He
did  not get his  doctrine from  committee,  but  directly from the Lord.
He was actually shown things not  to  be communicated to others.  He, 
along with  Dr. Luke,  is also responsible for much of  the Scripture in 
the  New Testament.  No one else,  it seems,  was  authoritative  as he. 
His secret may well  have been in thinking of  himself  as  “least of  the 
Apostles,”  and his three years in Arabia alone with God.

       Today, most men who preach the gospel have spent a great deal
of time in school learning their profession and how best to present a
coherent and interesting sermon.  Is it possible their doctrine or per-
sonal  belief system is  highly influenced by the same professors who
teach,  Greek,  Hebrew homiletics and  other necessary subjects for
Pastor/Teachers?   Would  it not be best for  men who  are called of
God to get away on their own with the Lord to learn doctrine rather
than learn it from a committee?   If  a young man is called into voca-
tional service of  our Lord,  and soon after begins to attend a univer-
sity or  Bible College,  is he not at risk of  just parroting what he has
learned from professors rather than getting into God’s Word, alone,
finding treasure from the Lord?  The same may be true of individual
“pew sitters” who take in 2-3 sermons or Bible studies per week and
fail to act as the Church of Berea in the New Testament who studied
the  Scripture to  determine  if the teaching were true and consistent
with known truth, the Old Testament.  

  The danger in becoming one who studies God’s Word alone is, one 
may become overly critical of  preaching or Bible teachers and alie-
nate  himself  from  the congregation.  The plus side is for that one, 
who is learning Scriptural principle on his own, to become a teacher 
of  the best and that can only come directly from  personal study of 
the Scripture,  prayer and leadership of  the Spirit of Christ.  Much 
Bible teaching today seems to be a product of the flesh rather than 
Spirit. ( We do not judge)  How do we know this?  It  is self evident 
because of the controversy and disagreement on doctrine from our 
Spiritual leaders.   If each were  “...led by the Spirit,”  there would  
not be the jealousy, envy and strife that plagues us as evangelicals 
today.   Another way of  putting  it;  if men would spend time alone 
with God, when they came together there would be a cohesive,  or
humble spirit that would lead to agreement. This seems a paradox, 
but since there would be a common source for the doctrine,  would 
it not be consistent?  There is one another element.  As one spends 
time with Deity,  he  comes away with a humility  born of  spending 
time with one infinitely greater than him/herself.  Possibly most of 
our strife is born of an inadequate view of our Lord or is it possible 
we do not even know God, and have only a second hand knowledge 
of Him drawn from the study of others,  not our own? donporter,sr         

9.27.12  ed. 11.24.14