It was obvious Saul was losing his popularity, power and anointing, but David waited for God to break the reed (remove him), and did not do it himself.
One night David cut off a little corner of Saul's garment and then cried bitterly when he realized he had harmed Saul -- even though it was just a little harm. Saul was in David's hand. It seemed as though God had given Saul to David so he could kill the King. But David knew the lesson about coming into the kingdom and taking over the throne, so he did not touch or harm Saul. God had bruised the reed. All David had to do was give the reed (Saul) a little snap and it would be broken (dead) and he (David) would be king. Be he did not do it (I Sam. 25:5).
of Saul's garment in the past, (slightly hurt a group or person who used to have the Spirit of God in their lives) then change your mind about it and say you are sorry and repent. Ask Jesus to forgive you and He will. Then, do not touch Saul any more. If those people "throw a javelin" at you (like Saul did at David) the only thing you are allowed to do is sidestep.
Yes, they hate you. They know you have the anointing; they have seen the hand of God upon you; they have seen the miracles that are happening in your life and naturally compare them to the way things are slipping away from their kingdom. Therefore, they do all sorts of silly things -- really crazy. Saul went out of his head. That is the way those people (groups) act when they see the anointing of God leave them and go onto others. People actually go crazy! They tell lies about you. They misunderstand your acts and intentions. They misquote you. But you are not allowed to strike back at them. And a hard part of the whole thing is to remember that they are still Christians -immature -- yes, but still Christians.
If your leaders spend most of their time preaching and teaching against things (rather than for things) you might suspect they are trying to teach FEAR rather than LOVE. If they are teaching fear it is probably because they fear you will leave them if you look into a newly revealed Bible truth they do not teach.
Jesus is building His church on the rock of "continuous revelation" -- that indicates continuous change. I used to think the rock was the confession of faith; that indicates no change at all, after the first confession. Jesus said, "But whom say ye that I am?" Peter said, "Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God." That made me think the rock was Peter's confession of faith -- because I was trained in an evangelical church and that is what we all told each other it meant. Later some Roman Catholic friends pointed out to me they believed the rock Jesus referred to was Peter, the first Pope of the Roman Catholic Church.
(small stone) and upon this rock I will build my church." It seemed to me the Catholic idea had some merit because of the principle of the doctrine of laying on of hands (Heb. 6:2) for apostolic succession.
Later on, again, I heard a third idea that makes more sense to me now than the first two. Jesus told Peter. "Flesh and blood hath not REVEALED it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven." The idea is that the rock is the CONTINUOUS REVELATION of truth. In this case the Father revealed something to Peter that he never could have known any other way. After that, the Father revealed more truth to Stephen, Paul, John, etc. and the Church was built on God's "CONTINUOUS REVELATION".
God continued to reveal His truth to men like Luther, Simon, Calvin, Knox, Wesley, etc., and the Church has been continuously constructed through "CONTINUOUS REVELATION". This concept leads to the thought that God is probably continuing to reveal His truth to men, even now.
However, we also notice with caution, that all newly revealed truth is confirmed by old truth hidden in passages of the Bible -- the Word of God. In other words - continuous revelation never contradicts the Bible.
Jesus said, "Thou art Peter
We continuously receive a better understanding of what God already said.
The group of Christians you could be thinking about might be a bruised reed if they have taken a stand against newly revealed truth. Are they sectarian? Do they teach they have all truth? Do they imply that other groups are wrong because they are right? If so, they could be a bruised reed.
Was this article helpful?