Discernment of The Holy Spirit and Not the Opinions of Man — Find My Heart in the Matter!

On 18th May The LORD said to me,  “I have given you all Discernment and Wisdom by My Spirit, but I have not made you judge and jury.

Stop pointing your finger in accusation or I will have to tie your hands behind your back until you learn from My Humility and Love.

I will make you wise if you ask and do not abuse My Gift to feel superior to your brethren.

I have plans for you that you keep thwarting in the most unwise  and ridiculous ways.

Repent and be renewed!”

“Not that we are competent in ourselves to claim anything for ourselves, but our competence comes from God.”   2 Corinthians 3:5.

“Stop judging by mere appearances, but instead judge correctly.”   John 7:24.

“Why do you pass judgment on your brother? Or you, why do you despise your brother? For we will all stand before the judgment seat of God; for it is written, “As I live, says The LORD, every knee shall bow to me, and every tongue shall confess to God.””   Romans 14:10-13.

“So then each of us will give an account of himself to God.

Therefore let us not pass judgment on one another any longer, but rather decide never to put a stumbling block or hindrance in the way of a brother.”

“Judge not, that you be not judged.  For with the judgment you pronounce you will be judged, and with the measure you use it will be measured to you.  Why do you see the speck that is in your brother’s eye, but do not notice the log that is in your own eye?  Or how can you say to your brother, ‘Let me take the speck out of your eye,’ when there is the log in your own eye?  You hypocrite, first take the log out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to take the speck out of your brother’s eye.”   Matthew 7:1-5.

Historical Ruminations

Years ago, when I was still at primary [elementary] school, I learned about a young lady from centuries before and wanted to know more.

In the course of research, as with so many women, I found very little real information, other than her skill at dancing.  I trawled through works on her relatives and general period of history.

More is published about her husband, whom she was married to while she was still a child.

Appointed to office young, he died before her, aged under 25, but being a man, not a woman, his life is better recorded by history.

And yet it isn’t.  He is more studied than his wife, but I found it all very contradictory.

Historians generally say that had he lived, he would have been disastrous for his nation.  The modern view is that he was impetuous, self-aggrandising and stubborn.

Yet period accounts, even by his enemies, described him as a skilled statesman, personable, competent, measured and self-controlled to a degree unusual in one so young.

His country concluded a peace with another nation that he did not agree with. Historians say he wanted to increase his family’s power and prestige and was willing to break the peace to get it.

He definitely stayed in touch with his former allies, who secretly sent him a draft treaty to defy the peace, ally with them again and go to war again to claim territory for himself.

We know for a fact he never received the draft. It arrived when he was already dying and too weak to work.

Would he have betrayed his country, defied the peace and potentially plunged them into another war?  Only God can say.

One eminent historian asserts his public statements of political and religious views were a cynical strategy to get more power, and that his father didn’t trust him.

Other sources say by then his father was probably suffering from dementia, which is sometimes accompanied by paranoia, that his mother was the real power and she was manoeuvring to protect her only son from war.

He may have wanted more power but he also seems to have held a genuine personal antipathy to the country he saw as directly responsible for the assassination of his grandfather.

His tutor, a devout minister, believed he was sincere in his faith and expected much of him.

He had personal audiences with theologians in an era when that was uncommon, and his political advice to his brother-in-law was in agreement with his spiritual outlook.

One biography says he was spoiled and unpredictable, indulging himself in sports from hunting and real tennis to yachting and swimming.

The English version of Wikipedia claims he was in perfect health until his last illness, so his death was unexpected.

But historical accounts described him as self-restrained, generous and affable, with personal charisma, though inclined to melancholy which he countered through physical exercise.

A sculpture of the time shows he may have had pectus excavatus, or concave chest, which can indicate cardio-respiratory issues.

He certainly experienced health problems and his cousin said he himself expected to die young.

The modern view is that he had extramarital relationships with women, “especially French actresses”.

Note the plural.  I found period gossip relating to a specific actress.  Only one, and only gossip, so we can’t prove it either way.

The English version of Wikipedia confidently asserts during his marriage to his child bride that he had a baby with another woman, who wasn’t an actress.

His cousin’s diary relates that he’d been so ill then he could only “visit” his wife ten times that whole winter.

An English language scholarly paper on espionage and cryptography repeated the claim about the baby as though it was proven, but then highlighted how his secret political dealings kept him up late and this gave rise to rumours of his having secret liaisons and being bent on pleasures when he was actually working.

No, that doesn’t disprove Wikipedia, but it does cast a different light on the claim.

The Wikipedia version of his home nation doesn’t even mention other women.  So why are English language sources focussing on that?

There’s more and all in the same vein.  As far as I can see, much of the current research is actually much older research being reinterpreted according to the personal opinion of the historian, instead of fresh gathering of evidence and impartial historical evaluation.

Other historical figures have so many books published about them that it’s almost overkill, but neither this lady nor even her husband received much scholarly attention.

The fact is, that for all the evidence currently published, we don’t really have much of a clue about them, their characters, what they were really like, their motivations etc.

There’s no modern biography and despite her longer life and his short but significant time in office, their surviving paperwork and correspondence hasn’t even been fully catalogued.

We just don’t know.  We never really can, even after research.  We frequently find ourselves surprised by our own behaviour or that of the loved ones we know best.

Why do we keep kidding ourselves we know other people? Especially those we have never met?

I have seen too many who claim to be Christian making heavy pronouncements for and against other people.

Sometimes I can see exactly why they say it, but sometimes I can also see that for all their talk, they don’t have God’s heart of love for people.

Sometimes it is ignorance and fear that leads them.  Sometimes it is prejudice, and sometimes it is sheer arrogance.

“You can see it in his eyes,” or, “It’s not democratic,” is not the leading of The Holy Spirit.

Let’s make a commitment to keep our opinions away from it all and let God within us make right judgements.

 

~ Iris Maud, UK.

---

Iris Maud, UK.

Back to Top