🏠 首页 🔝
事奉类 › 事奉主者的异象、职事与引导 › 第四篇　在身体里受引导㈡

第四篇　在身体里受引导㈡

事奉主者的异象、职事与引导

📖 研读 📊 汇集 🇬🇧 English 📋 对照
　　读经：徒十五36~41，十六6~7。
　　关于工作上的引导，第一应当注意，受引导不是个人的，乃是在身体里，在团体里的。关于这点，圣徒们必须好好读行传头十三章，特别要注意使徒们当时如何同工，如何受工作上的引导。在主耶稣升天之后，门徒们在地上作工，其重要的点就是同受引导。你难得找出某个人单独的受引导，单独的行动。虽然腓利在福音上有过好像单独的行动和引导，但我们若好好读过使徒行传，会看见他的引导和行动，仍然不是单独的，乃是在团体里，是身体的（徒八5~17）。
　
　　关于受引导，第二点是要注意在工作上不能有个人的感情。在徒十五章，巴拿巴和保罗在受引导的事上，有了争执。这一次他们受引导，要往外去看望弟兄们。看望弟兄们，乃是他们共同的引导；但是在带不带马可这件事上，两个人有了不同。巴拿巴坚持要带马可，保罗却说不可（徒十五36~39）。
　　圣经对他们两个人的争执，记载得很简单，但从相关的经节可以看出，为什么巴拿巴说可，保罗说不可。西四10说到，马可是巴拿巴的表弟，可见巴拿巴和马可有亲戚关系。所以，这里自然可以有一个断定：巴拿巴主张非带马可去不可，可能有亲戚的情感掺杂在内。
　　当他们头一次出去作工时，马可曾经随着他们，但中途就退出了。为什么退出？因为遇到难处。他们到了旁非利亚，那里相当危险和艰难（徒十三13）。马可退去的这件事，是要不得的，因为在属灵争战上，这非常违反神的原则。在前线作战的军人，如何不可以临阵脱逃，为主作工的人也是如此。你若中途退去，可能同伴们就要受影响倒下去。还好，保罗和巴拿巴比较刚强，没有倒下。
　　因着马可那次的退去，保罗觉得必须给他惩治。所以，当他们第二次出门的时候，马可还要跟着去，保罗就说不可以。保罗说不可以，乃是执行神在工作上的一个管治。因为作主的工，不是人高兴就去，不高兴就不去。在工作上共同受引导，共同行动的时候，不能有自己个人的随便。
　　在此，附带的说，一个主的仆人惩治别人的错误，没有第二个办法，只有一个办法，就是不管他，不带他，不让他同工。比方，保罗、巴拿巴、马可三人同受引导去作工，到了旁非利亚，马可怕吃苦，受不了，中途退去。从人这面看，保罗没有办法对付他。他不能把马可的行装扣下，神的仆人不能作这事，只好下一次出门不带他。神的仆人没有别的方法可以惩治，只有不带他一途。比方，若是在某地，有弟兄一直说我讲的信息不好，我别无他法，只有－马可一个办法，就是不再去那里，不再讲，不再说。这个不去、不讲、不说，就是对那地方的惩治。事奉主的人，在主的工作上从来只有－马可一个“不”的惩罚。马可退去了，只好下次不带他。这个不带就是惩治。
　　保罗这样作并不是凭着他的血气，保罗相当认识神，他不能推翻神行政的原则。爱心不能推翻神的行政。合神的原则，神就祝福；不合神的原则，神就不祝福。所以保罗下一次不带马可，完全是站在神工作的原则上，执行神的行政。
　　然而，巴拿巴忽略了神的行政，忽略了神工作的原则，同时巴拿巴让亲戚的情感进入工作。保罗说不带马可，巴拿巴还是要带，－马可二人就发生争执。这就是工人注重属人关系的感觉，而在神工作的原则上出了事。保罗始终站住神的原则，而巴拿巴始终主张自己的感觉，甚至两个人因此分裂了。
　　圣经给我们看见，争执过后，巴拿巴带着马可出门，并没有弟兄们给他送行（徒十五39）。圣经接着说，“保罗却拣选了西拉，也出去，蒙弟兄们把他交与主的恩典。”（40）当两人相争的时候，不对的那方定规先有行动，对的那方定规最后行动。我们读那段圣经就可以知道，圣灵判断巴拿巴是错的。争执过后，巴拿巴不管保罗怎样说，也不管弟兄们怎样说，还是带着马可走。然而他走的时候，没有人给他送行。但圣经却记载，弟兄们给保罗和西拉送行，把他们交与主的恩典。从这时候起，巴拿巴就落到单独里了。他还作工，还是使徒，但圣经不记载他的工作。从这里开始，巴拿巴就从圣灵的引导里落下去了。
　　神的原则是丝毫不苟且的，神的行政是丝毫不容让的。人只能就祂，祂不能就人。人不能把神的行政拖来就人，人只能照着神的原则，不能叫祂照着人的感觉。什么时候人不照祂的原则，而照自己的感觉作工，祂就把人丢在一边。在神的工作上，绝对不能把个人的感觉带进来。
　　我里面有个很重的感觉，是多年和弟兄姊妹一同事奉主，所产生出来的。多年来，我和弟兄姊妹事奉主，所碰到的一个难处，就是大家一同受引导时，许多人有个人的感觉。这种所谓的个人感觉，就是私人的情感。比方，有两位弟兄平日很谈得来，非常投机，两人在主里交情很深。当多位同工一起寻求引导时，很希奇，十次有八次，他们二人都觉得应该一同去某地作工。然而其他人觉得，这位弟兄去可能有主的意思，但那位弟兄去太勉强。这位弟兄却说，那位弟兄如果不去，他就无法作工。同工们就说，“如果你一个人去觉得孤单，好不好另外某弟兄和你同去？”这位弟兄又说，某弟兄去恐怕不是合乎主的。这个“恐怕不是合乎主的”，是谎话，应该说，“跟我合不来。”
　　今天，这个难处在姊妹们身上更严重。根据观察，凡是两个同工不能拆开的，结果没有主的祝福。同工姊妹们常是一对一对在一起，声辩说，“当初主耶稣差遣门徒的时候，岂不也是一对一对的么？我们出门不也该一对一对么？”然而事实证明，到了一个时候，一对姊妹拆不开，就是有了人的感情。
　　盼望弟兄姊妹要学习一件事，在同工们中没有人情的感觉。这事必须对付得干干净净；个人的感情非常杀死引导。若是我们众人聚集在一起，谈我们的引导，这不是一件简单的事。若是你说，主引导我去基隆，并且最好是某某弟兄和我同去。你能保证其中百分之百没有个人的感情么？个人的感觉在工作上，在同工中间，必须对付得干干净净。
　　不只在受引导的事上，即使在工作的事上，也不能有个人的感情。虽然某弟兄和我个人感情最好，但是在工作上，他有错误，我还得对他说厉害的话。这样，你在工作的引导上，才能看得清楚，看得准确。
　　千万不要把巴拿巴带马可的事，当作无关紧要，这完全是人的感情。有一天你会看见，巴拿巴里面的难处，在你里面也有。我提起这一点，是为防患未然。等你发现自己里面有这情形时，你要定罪这事，拒绝这事。
　　在主的工作上，人可以有弱点，可以有错误；这还不一定违反主工作上的行政。但什么时候人把私人感情带进来，就违反主工作行政的原则。我们要怕个人的感情，过于害怕跌倒、犯罪或作错。在工作的原则上，个人的感情比我们跌倒、犯罪、作错还要严重。这个会叫我们离开工作的路线。
　
　　第三，工作的引导虽然是团体的，却不会完全抹煞个人受的引导。比方，我们一同事奉主的人，大家在一起寻求，觉得某弟兄应该去花莲，他在身体里的感觉也是如此，结果他就去了。他到了花莲，经过两周的祷告，觉得该有八天的布道会，他需不需要打电报来请示我们呢？并不需要。那么他是不是单独行动？绝对不是。在这里我们要看见，虽然我们是共同受引导，但是在工作的行动上，不能把个人受引导的事完全抹煞。当那位弟兄到了花莲，只要圣灵给他引导，他就可以作，不必来请示。况且，他若要请示，该向谁请示？是不是有一个上级机关，接受他的请示？绝对没有。今日基督教里的差会，若是派了两个传教士到花莲，他们在花莲的每一个工作行动，都要报告请示差会。然而在主的引导中，这是不对的。
　　保罗和西拉在弟兄们中间受引导往外去，弟兄们给他们送行，把他们交在主的恩典中（徒十五40）。之后，保罗和西拉到了亚西亚，他们想留在亚西亚，但圣灵禁止他们（十六6）。这时，他们是否还要说，“有圣灵的禁止还不够，我们要写信问安提阿的弟兄们，是否答应我们离开亚西亚？”他们若这样作就错了。他们在工作的行动上，应当有个人受引导的自由。然后，他们觉得应该离开亚西亚，当他们要往庇推尼去时，耶稣的灵又不许。结果他们只好往西走，来到特罗亚（7~8）。圣灵没有禁止，耶稣的灵也没有不许他们往那里，反而圣灵在夜间给保罗看见异象，有一个人站着求他说，“请你过到马其顿来帮助我们。”（9）这时他们就清楚了；福音就是这样传到了欧洲。
　　今天众地方召会之间的交通，也是这样。所有的地方召会，无论大小，在神面前的地位都是相等的。虽然有些大的地方召会比较老练，蒙恩多一点，但是大召会永远只能站在扶持小召会的地位，不能站在管治小召会的地位。
　　我们要清楚一件事，我们只有交通里的合一，没有组织上的阶层。召会没有一个总会，更没有分会。有的圣徒似乎有一种感觉，觉得台北召会是总会。这个错觉是因为：第一，台北是同工们集中的地方。比方，有时我们召集同工弟兄姊妹，这不是召会的事，是同工们的事，不过是采用台北这个地点，因为这里的召会大，许多事方便作。第二，当我们在台北召开同工聚会，因为台北召会就在这里，我们把他们也包括进来了。这是我们顾到台北而有的一个措施，但众圣徒不该把台北召会当作一个总会。
　　另一面，我们不能忽略在身体里的交通。若是一个小地方召会说，“我们和大地方召会的地位一样，为什么要请教他们？”这种态度虽不能说错，但十分不美。在我们中间，交通的关系应该越深越好。各地召会一面该一同站在主面前，另一面也该谦卑的请教别地召会，得一点扶助，得一点带领。一面来说，一位同工受引导到一个地方，不能只会看什么人是他的顶头上司，这是错误的；但另一面，他也该学习把他的工作交通给同工们，好得着同工们的印证，这是好事。
　　所以我们要看见，我们出门开展主的工作，在事奉上要共同受主的引导，但是当我们作的时候，还得学习个人受主引导，不能倚靠别人。我们必须像保罗和西拉一样，接受圣灵的禁止和不许。这是每一个为主作工的人，都得学习的。另一面，还得与当地的圣徒一同有交通，一同受引导。
　　盼望大家看见，我们没有组织，只有引导，共同学习在召会里一同事奉神。你若是离开这个地方召会，你还要在另一地和人一同受主引导。我们没有组织上的关系，但我们该凡事有交通，随时随地有交通。你在台北，就和台北的弟兄有交通；你在花莲，就和在花莲的弟兄有交通。
　　原谅我说，当初西教士到中国传福音，犯了一个大错。他们有个错误的观念，以为中国人太幼稚，所以不和中国圣徒交通，凡事都请示他们本国差会。按照真理，他们在中国传福音，有本地人得救，起来事奉主了，他们就该和这些弟兄姊妹一同寻求主，来断定他们的工作该怎么作。比方，你们在台中作工，就必须和台中的圣徒有交通，在那个交通里，看主的工作在台中该怎样作。你们不能说，“我们是弟兄们打发来的，你们很幼稚，我们不管你们。”这是放弃交通，持守组织。我们中间没有组织，只有交通，而交通乃是和一同事奉主的人交通。我们是随时随地，和主所安排的弟兄姊妹一同有交通。
　
　　第四，一个事奉主的人，应该学习随时随地接受负担。从使徒行传可以看见，保罗这个人常常能接受负担。十五36节记载：“保罗对巴拿巴说，我们要回到从前宣传主话的各城，看望弟兄们的景况如何。”十七16节又说，“保罗在雅典等候…的时候，看见满城都是偶像，他里面的灵就受到激愤。”于是，他想要在雅典好好传福音。
　　今天好些事奉主的人不会受引导，不会接受负担。引导摆在他面前，他还没有感觉。这种现象非常不对。每一个事奉主的人，在这事上都要好好操练，操练到一个地步，只要有一点负担就能感觉得到。
　　有时，我看见有的圣徒实在很幼稚，需要帮助，但是周围事奉主的人，在旁边视若无睹，好像这不是他的事。事奉主的人都要操练留意里面的感觉，－使徒行传一看见需要，里面就有负担。如果你的感觉不够敏锐，你在事奉主的事上就没有多少前途。
　
　　第五，在工作上几个人一同行动时，有一个很大的原则，就是他们的行动都是由前头弟兄主持。比方，保罗出去作工，并不是他一个人作，常有同工一起去。起先有巴拿巴，然后有西拉，以后有提摩太，后来有提多加进来，起码有四、五位同工。然而我们没有看到，保罗每一次有行动时，会先把所有工人召来开一个会，大家商议怎样作。反而都是保罗在安排，在断定。保罗是那个工作队里的领头，什么都是由领头安排。他要留路加在那里，路加就留在那里（提后四11）；他要打发提摩太到那里，提摩太就到那里（徒十七15，林前四17）。这也是工作的一个大原则。在主的工作里，任何一个场合，神只要一个头。
　　男女双方结婚，举行婚礼时，我们可以看见只有一个头，另一个头藏起来了。请记得，结婚若不是两个人只有一个头，那个婚姻定规是可怕的。无论古今中外，女人结婚时都是蒙头的。中国人的婚礼，也是只有男人把头露出来。你若看见一个一体两头的生物，那就是怪物。
　　在神的行政里，任何场合都只有一个头。二十个同工出门是一个头，两个同工出门也是一个头。使徒行传给我们看见，在彼得那个工作队里，彼得是头；在保罗那个工作队里，保罗是头。神从来不让人独裁，也从来不让人民主，神只要属乎祂的人都活在圣灵里。世上的政权有独裁，也有民主，但是召会里没有独裁，也没有民主，只有学习活在主里面。许多弟兄姊妹在一起时，总有一两位在前头，但不是由这一两位独裁定规，他们乃是根据旁边许多弟兄姊妹的感觉来定规。
　　比方，几位弟兄在花莲作工，如果遇事都用开会表决的方式定规，那就错了。该怎样定规呢？大家开会是对的，一同祷告谈论是对的，但最终该由领头弟兄根据许多圣徒里面的感觉作断定。一有了断定，弟兄姊妹都该学习顺服。
　　当保罗打发提摩太到帖撒罗尼迦时（帖前三2），提摩太没有说，“我要自己等候主的引导。”或者说，“我要自己祷告祷告看看。”保罗打发提摩太到那里，提摩太就到那里；保罗打发路加到那里，路加就到那里。一个在工作里行动的人，都得顺服那个工作里带领的人。在神的工作里，神从来不让人随便说，随便来，随便作工。行动一随便，就乱了。
　　我们要看见，我们在工作上一同行动时，主若是设立你作带领的人，你应该学习认识神在同工们身上所有的引导，认识神在他们身上所有的用意，然后作一个准确的判断，这样才有资格作带领的人。另一面，你若不是主所安排带领的人，你就得学习顺服前头带领的人。不然，那个工作定规会散、会乱。
　　这要求我们属灵。弟兄如果不属灵，作不了头。另一面，同工们如果没有学习，没有接受对付，没有被折服，没有受破碎，也难顺服另外一人。在神的行政里，都是权柄，都是等次，祂不要祂的行政里有混乱。
　
　　第六，就是我们要懂得主的心意。我们知道，保罗这个人末了是被下到监狱里。请问，保罗下监，是主要他去的呢，还是他自己去的？你读使徒行传能不能读出，是主引导保罗下监的？这很难读出来。保罗不是受主引导而下监的。圣灵反倒借着人拦阻他，叫他不要去（徒二一4，10~14）。那么，他为什么被下监？乃是他爱主爱到一个地步，甘心乐意的。
　　然而，这是不是主愿意保罗去带锁链呢？这一点，主是愿意的。那么，既是如此，主为什么不引导保罗？这问题很难答。就好像父亲有一个心愿，儿子若要去完成，要吃很大的苦，因此父亲就说，“你不要去。”但是在父亲心里，其实是有个心愿的。这是一件很矛盾的事。保罗最终就是这样。若是保罗对主的爱不够热切，主一拦阻，他马上就不去了，并且他或许也能说，“我去是轻举妄动，我不去是遵行主的旨意。”然而，保罗不仅活在主的命令里，他也活在主的心意里。我们要学习懂得主的心意。有时候，主的心意和命令是相违背的。父亲的心里有个心愿，但父亲的命令是不要儿子去完成那个心愿。你若是个孝子，你是照着父亲的心意作呢，还是照着父亲的命令作？
　　保罗末了的行程就是这样。所以许多人读使徒行传，读到这里就觉得糊涂。一面主对保罗说，不要去（徒二一4，11~12）；一面主又站在保罗旁边，告诉他：“不要害怕。”（二七23~24）所以保罗末次的行程，到底是遵行神的旨意，还是违背神的旨意，这在神学上是一个大的讲究。神的命令是不要他去，但神的心愿是要他去。保罗在行动上，表面是违反了神的命令，但实际上是行在神的旨意里。
　　所以，不要以主的命令作借口，要以主的心意为重。所有爱主的人，爱主到一个地步，都是超过命令的。只有这样的爱主，才能满足主的心。
　　我们常盼望主的命令不是要求得这样高，事情就好办。然而许多时候，主的命令所要求的，还远不如祂的心意所要的。许多时候我们要说，“主，我不仅要遵行你的命令，更要超过你命令的要求。”保罗末了的行程，就是超过主的命令，活在主的心意里，所以主喜悦。主没有告诉保罗，要保罗去为祂作囚，反而主叫他不要去。然而主的心意，是愿意这爱祂的人，能为祂带锁链。所以，后来主就再对他说，“保罗，不要害怕，你必站在该撒面前。”（徒二七24）在此我们看见，并要抓牢一个事实：爱主的爱，要超过主的命令。凡人没有主的爱，都是避重拣轻的。但愿我们在事奉主的事上，都甘心拣选难的，逃避易的；拣选重的，逃避轻的。
　　原刊于一九六四年十二月“话语职事”第一百六十二期
　　读经：使徒行传十五章三十六至四十一节，十六章六至七节。
--------本段经节汇集--------
徒15:36  
过了些日子，保罗对巴拿巴说，我们要回到从前宣传主话的各城，看望弟兄们的景况如何。
徒15:37  
巴拿巴定意也带着称呼马可的约翰同去，
徒15:38  
但保罗以为不带他同去是适宜的，因为马可从前曾在旁非利亚离开他们，不和他们同去作工。
徒15:39  
于是二人起了争执，甚至彼此分开；巴拿巴带着马可，坐船往居比路去；
徒15:40  
保罗却拣选了西拉，也出去，蒙弟兄们把他交与主的恩典。
徒15:41  
他就走遍叙利亚和基利家，坚固众召会。
徒16:6  
圣灵既然禁止他们在亚西亚讲道，他们就经过弗吕家和加拉太地区。
徒16:7  
到了每西亚的边界，他们试着要往庇推尼去，耶稣的灵却不许，
------------------------
　　关于工作上的引导，第一应当注意，受引导不是个人的，乃是在身体里，在团体里的。关于这点，圣徒们必须好好读行传头十三章，特别要注意使徒们当时如何同工，如何受工作上的引导。在主耶稣升天之后，门徒们在地上作工，其重要的点就是同受引导。你难得找出某个人单独的受引导，单独的行动。虽然腓利在福音上有过好像单独的行动和引导，但我们若好好读过使徒行传，会看见他的引导和行动，仍然不是单独的，乃是在团体里，是身体的（徒八5~17）。
--------本段经节汇集--------
徒8:5  
腓利下撒玛利亚城去，向他们传扬基督。
徒8:6  
群众听见了，又看见腓利所行的神迹，就同心合意地注意他所说的话。
徒8:7  
因为有许多人被污灵附着，那些污灵大声呼叫，就出来了；还有许多瘫痪的和瘸腿的，也都治好了。
徒8:8  
在那城里，就大有欢乐。
徒8:9  
有一个人名叫西门，向来在那城里行邪术，自称大人物，使撒玛利亚的百姓惊奇，
徒8:10  
众人从小到大都注意他，说，这人就是神的能力，那称为大的。
徒8:11  
他们注意他，因为他长久用邪术使他们惊奇。
徒8:12  
及至他们信了腓利所传神的国和耶稣基督之名的福音，连男带女就受了浸。
徒8:13  
连西门自己也信了，既受了浸，就常与腓利在一处，看见他所行的神迹和大异能，就甚惊奇。
徒8:14  
使徒在耶路撒冷，听见撒玛利亚人领受了神的话，就打发彼得、约翰往他们那里去，
徒8:15  
既到了，就为他们祷告，要叫他们受圣灵；
徒8:16  
因为圣灵还没有降在他们任何人身上，他们只是浸入主耶稣的名里。
徒8:17  
于是使徒按手在他们身上，他们就受了圣灵。
------------------------
　
　　关于受引导，第二点是要注意在工作上不能有个人的感情。在行传十五章，巴拿巴和保罗在受引导的事上，有了争执。这一次他们受引导，要往外去看望弟兄们。看望弟兄们，乃是他们共同的引导；但是在带不带马可这件事上，两个人有了不同。巴拿巴坚持要带马可，保罗却说不可（徒十五36~39）。
--------本段经节汇集--------
使徒行传十五章（略，若需要被汇集，请勾选“不忽略整章”）
徒15:36  
过了些日子，保罗对巴拿巴说，我们要回到从前宣传主话的各城，看望弟兄们的景况如何。
徒15:37  
巴拿巴定意也带着称呼马可的约翰同去，
徒15:38  
但保罗以为不带他同去是适宜的，因为马可从前曾在旁非利亚离开他们，不和他们同去作工。
徒15:39  
于是二人起了争执，甚至彼此分开；巴拿巴带着马可，坐船往居比路去；
------------------------
　　圣经对他们两个人的争执，记载得很简单，但从相关的经节可以看出，为什么巴拿巴说可，保罗说不可。歌罗西四章十节说到，马可是巴拿巴的表弟，可见巴拿巴和马可有亲戚关系。所以，这里自然可以有一个断定：巴拿巴主张非带马可去不可，可能有亲戚的情感掺杂在内。
--------本段经节汇集--------
西4:10  
与我一同坐监的亚里达古问你们安。巴拿巴的表弟马可也问你们安（说到这马可，你们已经受了吩咐，他若到了你们那里，你们就接待他）。
------------------------
　　当他们头一次出去作工时，马可曾经随着他们，但中途就退出了。为什么退出？因为遇到难处。他们到了旁非利亚，那里相当危险和艰难（徒十三13）。马可退去的这件事，是要不得的，因为在属灵争战上，这非常违反神的原则。在前线作战的军人，如何不可以临阵脱逃，为主作工的人也是如此。你若中途退去，可能同伴们就要受影响倒下去。还好，保罗和巴拿巴比较刚强，没有倒下。
--------本段经节汇集--------
徒13:13  
保罗和他的同伴从帕弗开船，来到旁非利亚的别加；约翰就离开他们，回耶路撒冷去。
------------------------
　　因着马可那次的退去，保罗觉得必须给他惩治。所以，当他们第二次出门的时候，马可还要跟着去，保罗就说不可以。保罗说不可以，乃是执行神在工作上的一个管治。因为作主的工，不是人高兴就去，不高兴就不去。在工作上共同受引导，共同行动的时候，不能有自己个人的随便。　　在此，附带的说，一个主的仆人惩治别人的错误，没有第二个办法，只有一个办法，就是不管他，不带他，不让他同工。比方，保罗、巴拿巴、马可三人同受引导去作工，到了旁非利亚，马可怕吃苦，受不了，中途退去。从人这面看，保罗没有办法对付他。他不能把马可的行装扣下，神的仆人不能作这事，只好下一次出门不带他。神的仆人没有别的方法可以惩治，只有不带他一途。比方，若是在某地，有弟兄一直说我讲的信息不好，我别无他法，只有一个办法，就是不再去那里，不再讲，不再说。这个不去、不讲、不说，就是对那地方的惩治。事奉主的人，在主的工作上从来只有一个“不”的惩罚。马可退去了，只好下次不带他。这个不带就是惩治。　　保罗这样作并不是凭着他的血气，保罗相当认识神，他不能推翻神行政的原则。爱心不能推翻神的行政。合神的原则，神就祝福；不合神的原则，神就不祝福。所以保罗下一次不带马可，完全是站在神工作的原则上，执行神的行政。　　然而，巴拿巴忽略了神的行政，忽略了神工作的原则，同时巴拿巴让亲戚的情感进入工作。保罗说不带马可，巴拿巴还是要带，二人就发生争执。这就是工人注重属人关系的感觉，而在神工作的原则上出了事。保罗始终站住神的原则，而巴拿巴始终主张自己的感觉，甚至两个人因此分裂了。　　圣经给我们看见，争执过后，巴拿巴带着马可出门，并没有弟兄们给他送行（徒十五39）。圣经接着说，“保罗却拣选了西拉，也出去，蒙弟兄们把他交与主的恩典。”（40）当两人相争的时候，不对的那方定规先有行动，对的那方定规最后行动。我们读那段圣经就可以知道，圣灵判断巴拿巴是错的。争执过后，巴拿巴不管保罗怎样说，也不管弟兄们怎样说，还是带着马可走。然而他走的时候，没有人给他送行。但圣经却记载，弟兄们给保罗和西拉送行，把他们交与主的恩典。从这时候起，巴拿巴就落到单独里了。他还作工，还是使徒，但圣经不记载他的工作。从这里开始，巴拿巴就从圣灵的引导里落下去了。
--------本段经节汇集--------
徒15:39  
于是二人起了争执，甚至彼此分开；巴拿巴带着马可，坐船往居比路去；
徒15:40  
保罗却拣选了西拉，也出去，蒙弟兄们把他交与主的恩典。
------------------------
　　神的原则是丝毫不苟且的，神的行政是丝毫不容让的。人只能就祂，祂不能就人。人不能把神的行政拖来就人，人只能照着神的原则，不能叫祂照着人的感觉。什么时候人不照祂的原则，而照自己的感觉作工，祂就把人丢在一边。在神的工作上，绝对不能把个人的感觉带进来。　　我里面有个很重的感觉，是多年和弟兄姊妹一同事奉主，所产生出来的。多年来，我和弟兄姊妹事奉主，所碰到的一个难处，就是大家一同受引导时，许多人有个人的感觉。这种所谓的个人感觉，就是私人的情感。比方，有两位弟兄平日很谈得来，非常投机，两人在主里交情很深。当多位同工一起寻求引导时，很希奇，十次有八次，他们二人都觉得应该一同去某地作工。然而其他人觉得，这位弟兄去可能有主的意思，但那位弟兄去太勉强。这位弟兄却说，那位弟兄如果不去，他就无法作工。同工们就说，“如果你一个人去觉得孤单，好不好另外某弟兄和你同去？”这位弟兄又说，某弟兄去恐怕不是合乎主的。这个“恐怕不是合乎主的”，是谎话，应该说，“跟我合不来。”　　今天，这个难处在姊妹们身上更严重。根据观察，凡是两个同工不能拆开的，结果没有主的祝福。同工姊妹们常是一对一对在一起，声辩说，“当初主耶稣差遣门徒的时候，岂不也是一对一对的么？我们出门不也该一对一对么？”然而事实证明，到了一个时候，一对姊妹拆不开，就是有了人的感情。
--------本段经节汇集--------
哈该书一章（略，若需要被汇集，请勾选“不忽略整章”）
哈该书一章（略，若需要被汇集，请勾选“不忽略整章”）
------------------------
　　盼望弟兄姊妹要学习一件事，在同工们中没有人情的感觉。这事必须对付得干干净净；个人的感情非常杀死引导。若是我们众人聚集在一起，谈我们的引导，这不是一件简单的事。若是你说，主引导我去基隆，并且最好是某某弟兄和我同去。你能保证其中百分之百没有个人的感情么？个人的感觉在工作上，在同工中间，必须对付得干干净净。　　不只在受引导的事上，即使在工作的事上，也不能有个人的感情。虽然某弟兄和我个人感情最好，但是在工作上，他有错误，我还得对他说厉害的话。这样，你在工作的引导上，才能看得清楚，看得准确。　　千万不要把巴拿巴带马可的事，当作无关紧要，这完全是人的感情。有一天你会看见，巴拿巴里面的难处，在你里面也有。我提起这一点，是为防患未然。等你发现自己里面有这情形时，你要定罪这事，拒绝这事。　　在主的工作上，人可以有弱点，可以有错误；这还不一定违反主工作上的行政。但什么时候人把私人感情带进来，就违反主工作行政的原则。我们要怕个人的感情，过于害怕跌倒、犯罪或作错。在工作的原则上，个人的感情比我们跌倒、犯罪、作错还要严重。这个会叫我们离开工作的路线。
　
　　第三，工作的引导虽然是团体的，却不会完全抹煞个人受的引导。比方，我们一同事奉主的人，大家在一起寻求，觉得某弟兄应该去花莲，他在身体里的感觉也是如此，结果他就去了。他到了花莲，经过两周的祷告，觉得该有八天的布道会，他需不需要打电报来请示我们呢？并不需要。那么他是不是单独行动？绝对不是。在这里我们要看见，虽然我们是共同受引导，但是在工作的行动上，不能把个人受引导的事完全抹煞。当那位弟兄到了花莲，只要圣灵给他引导，他就可以作，不必来请示。况且，他若要请示，该向谁请示？是不是有一个上级机关，接受他的请示？绝对没有。今日基督教里的差会，若是派了两个传教士到花莲，他们在花莲的每一个工作行动，都要报告请示差会。然而在主的引导中，这是不对的。　　保罗和西拉在弟兄们中间受引导往外去，弟兄们给他们送行，把他们交在主的恩典中（徒十五40）。之后，保罗和西拉到了亚西亚，他们想留在亚西亚，但圣灵禁止他们（十六6）。这时，他们是否还要说，“有圣灵的禁止还不够，我们要写信问安提阿的弟兄们，是否答应我们离开亚西亚？”他们若这样作就错了。他们在工作的行动上，应当有个人受引导的自由。然后，他们觉得应该离开亚西亚，当他们要往庇推尼去时，耶稣的灵又不许。结果他们只好往西走，来到特罗亚（7~8）。圣灵没有禁止，耶稣的灵也没有不许他们往那里，反而圣灵在夜间给保罗看见异象，有一个人站着求他说，“请你过到马其顿来帮助我们。”（9）这时他们就清楚了；福音就是这样传到了欧洲。
--------本段经节汇集--------
徒15:40  
保罗却拣选了西拉，也出去，蒙弟兄们把他交与主的恩典。
徒16:6  
圣灵既然禁止他们在亚西亚讲道，他们就经过弗吕家和加拉太地区。
徒16:7  
到了每西亚的边界，他们试着要往庇推尼去，耶稣的灵却不许，
徒16:8  
他们就越过每西亚，下到特罗亚去。
徒16:9  
在夜间有异象现与保罗：有一个马其顿人站着求他说，请你过到马其顿来帮助我们。
------------------------
　　今天众地方召会之间的交通，也是这样。所有的地方召会，无论大小，在神面前的地位都是相等的。虽然有些大的地方召会比较老练，蒙恩多一点，但是大召会永远只能站在扶持小召会的地位，不能站在管治小召会的地位。　　我们要清楚一件事，我们只有交通里的合一，没有组织上的阶层。召会没有一个总会，更没有分会。有的圣徒似乎有一种感觉，觉得台北召会是总会。这个错觉是因为：第一，台北是同工们集中的地方。比方，有时我们召集同工弟兄姊妹，这不是召会的事，是同工们的事，不过是采用台北这个地点，因为这里的召会大，许多事方便作。第二，当我们在台北召开同工聚会，因为台北召会就在这里，我们把他们也包括进来了。这是我们顾到台北而有的一个措施，但众圣徒不该把台北召会当作一个总会。　　另一面，我们不能忽略在身体里的交通。若是一个小地方召会说，“我们和大地方召会的地位一样，为什么要请教他们？”这种态度虽不能说错，但十分不美。在我们中间，交通的关系应该越深越好。各地召会一面该一同站在主面前，另一面也该谦卑的请教别地召会，得一点扶助，得一点带领。一面来说，一位同工受引导到一个地方，不能只会看什么人是他的顶头上司，这是错误的；但另一面，他也该学习把他的工作交通给同工们，好得着同工们的印证，这是好事。
--------本段经节汇集--------
但以理书一章（略，若需要被汇集，请勾选“不忽略整章”）
但以理书一章（略，若需要被汇集，请勾选“不忽略整章”）
------------------------
　　所以我们要看见，我们出门开展主的工作，在事奉上要共同受主的引导，但是当我们作的时候，还得学习个人受主引导，不能倚靠别人。我们必须像保罗和西拉一样，接受圣灵的禁止和不许。这是每一个为主作工的人，都得学习的。另一面，还得与当地的圣徒一同有交通，一同受引导。
--------本段经节汇集--------
以斯拉记一章（略，若需要被汇集，请勾选“不忽略整章”）
------------------------
　　盼望大家看见，我们没有组织，只有引导，共同学习在召会里一同事奉神。你若是离开这个地方召会，你还要在另一地和人一同受主引导。我们没有组织上的关系，但我们该凡事有交通，随时随地有交通。你在台北，就和台北的弟兄有交通；你在花莲，就和在花莲的弟兄有交通。　　原谅我说，当初西教士到中国传福音，犯了一个大错。他们有个错误的观念，以为中国人太幼稚，所以不和中国圣徒交通，凡事都请示他们本国差会。按照真理，他们在中国传福音，有本地人得救，起来事奉主了，他们就该和这些弟兄姊妹一同寻求主，来断定他们的工作该怎么作。比方，你们在台中作工，就必须和台中的圣徒有交通，在那个交通里，看主的工作在台中该怎样作。你们不能说，“我们是弟兄们打发来的，你们很幼稚，我们不管你们。”这是放弃交通，持守组织。我们中间没有组织，只有交通，而交通乃是和一同事奉主的人交通。我们是随时随地，和主所安排的弟兄姊妹一同有交通。
　
　　第四，一个事奉主的人，应该学习随时随地接受负担。从使徒行传可以看见，保罗这个人常常能接受负担。十五章三十六节记载：“保罗对巴拿巴说，我们要回到从前宣传主话的各城，看望弟兄们的景况如何。”十七章十六节又说，“保罗在雅典等候…的时候，看见满城都是偶像，他里面的灵就受到激愤。”于是，他想要在雅典好好传福音。
--------本段经节汇集--------
徒15:36  
过了些日子，保罗对巴拿巴说，我们要回到从前宣传主话的各城，看望弟兄们的景况如何。
徒17:16  
保罗在雅典等候他们的时候，看见满城都是偶像，他里面的灵就受到激愤。
------------------------
　　今天好些事奉主的人不会受引导，不会接受负担。引导摆在他面前，他还没有感觉。这种现象非常不对。每一个事奉主的人，在这事上都要好好操练，操练到一个地步，只要有一点负担就能感觉得到。　　有时，我看见有的圣徒实在很幼稚，需要帮助，但是周围事奉主的人，在旁边视若无睹，好像这不是他的事。事奉主的人都要操练留意里面的感觉，一看见需要，里面就有负担。如果你的感觉不够敏锐，你在事奉主的事上就没有多少前途。
　
　　第五，在工作上几个人一同行动时，有一个很大的原则，就是他们的行动都是由前头弟兄主持。比方，保罗出去作工，并不是他一个人作，常有同工一起去。起先有巴拿巴，然后有西拉，以后有提摩太，后来有提多加进来，起码有四、五位同工。然而我们没有看到，保罗每一次有行动时，会先把所有工人召来开一个会，大家商议怎样作。反而都是保罗在安排，在断定。保罗是那个工作队里的领头，什么都是由领头安排。他要留路加在那里，路加就留在那里（提后四11）；他要打发提摩太到那里，提摩太就到那里（徒十七15，林前四17）。这也是工作的一个大原则。在主的工作里，任何一个场合，神只要一个头。
--------本段经节汇集--------
提后4:11  
独有路加同我在一起。你要接得马可，带他同来，因为他在服事上对我有用处。
徒17:15  
护送保罗的人带他到了雅典；既领了保罗给西拉和提摩太的命令，叫他们赶紧到他这里来，就回去了。
林前4:17  
因此我已打发提摩太到你们那里去；他在主里是我所亲爱、忠信的孩子；他必提醒你们，我在基督耶稣里怎样行事，正如我在各处各召会中所教导的。
------------------------
　　男女双方结婚，举行婚礼时，我们可以看见只有一个头，另一个头藏起来了。请记得，结婚若不是两个人只有一个头，那个婚姻定规是可怕的。无论古今中外，女人结婚时都是蒙头的。中国人的婚礼，也是只有男人把头露出来。你若看见一个一体两头的生物，那就是怪物。　　在神的行政里，任何场合都只有一个头。二十个同工出门是一个头，两个同工出门也是一个头。使徒行传给我们看见，在彼得那个工作队里，彼得是头；在保罗那个工作队里，保罗是头。神从来不让人独裁，也从来不让人民主，神只要属乎祂的人都活在圣灵里。世上的政权有独裁，也有民主，但是召会里没有独裁，也没有民主，只有学习活在主里面。许多弟兄姊妹在一起时，总有一两位在前头，但不是由这一两位独裁定规，他们乃是根据旁边许多弟兄姊妹的感觉来定规。　　比方，几位弟兄在花莲作工，如果遇事都用开会表决的方式定规，那就错了。该怎样定规呢？大家开会是对的，一同祷告谈论是对的，但最终该由领头弟兄根据许多圣徒里面的感觉作断定。一有了断定，弟兄姊妹都该学习顺服。　　当保罗打发提摩太到帖撒罗尼迦时（帖前三2），提摩太没有说，“我要自己等候主的引导。”或者说，“我要自己祷告祷告看看。”保罗打发提摩太到那里，提摩太就到那里；保罗打发路加到那里，路加就到那里。一个在工作里行动的人，都得顺服那个工作里带领的人。在神的工作里，神从来不让人随便说，随便来，随便作工。行动一随便，就乱了。
--------本段经节汇集--------
帖前3:2  
打发我们的弟兄，在基督福音上作神同工的提摩太去，为着你们的信心，坚固并鼓励你们，
帖撒罗尼迦前书一章（略，若需要被汇集，请勾选“不忽略整章”）
------------------------
　　我们要看见，我们在工作上一同行动时，主若是设立你作带领的人，你应该学习认识神在同工们身上所有的引导，认识神在他们身上所有的用意，然后作一个准确的判断，这样才有资格作带领的人。另一面，你若不是主所安排带领的人，你就得学习顺服前头带领的人。不然，那个工作定规会散、会乱。　　这要求我们属灵。弟兄如果不属灵，作不了头。另一面，同工们如果没有学习，没有接受对付，没有被折服，没有受破碎，也难顺服另外一人。在神的行政里，都是权柄，都是等次，祂不要祂的行政里有混乱。
　
　　第六，就是我们要懂得主的心意。我们知道，保罗这个人末了是被下到监狱里。请问，保罗下监，是主要他去的呢，还是他自己去的？你读使徒行传能不能读出，是主引导保罗下监的？这很难读出来。保罗不是受主引导而下监的。圣灵反倒借着人拦阻他，叫他不要去（徒二一4，10~14）。那么，他为什么被下监？乃是他爱主爱到一个地步，甘心乐意的。
--------本段经节汇集--------
徒21:4  
我们找着了门徒，就在那里住了七天。他们借着那灵对保罗说，不要上耶路撒冷去。
徒21:10  
我们多住了几天，有一个申言者名叫亚迦布，从犹太下来。
徒21:11  
到了我们这里，就拿保罗的腰带，捆上自己的手脚，说，圣灵这样说，犹太人在耶路撒冷，要如此捆绑这腰带的主人，把他交在外邦人手里。
徒21:12  
我们听见这话，就和当地的人苦劝保罗不要上耶路撒冷去。
徒21:13  
保罗却回答说，你们为什么痛哭，使我心碎？我为主耶稣的名，不但被捆绑，就是死在耶路撒冷，我也准备好了。
徒21:14  
保罗既不听劝，我们也就静默，只说，愿主的旨意成就。
------------------------
　　然而，这是不是主愿意保罗去带锁链呢？这一点，主是愿意的。那么，既是如此，主为什么不引导保罗？这问题很难答。就好像父亲有一个心愿，儿子若要去完成，要吃很大的苦，因此父亲就说，“你不要去。”但是在父亲心里，其实是有个心愿的。这是一件很矛盾的事。保罗最终就是这样。若是保罗对主的爱不够热切，主一拦阻，他马上就不去了，并且他或许也能说，“我去是轻举妄动，我不去是遵行主的旨意。”然而，保罗不仅活在主的命令里，他也活在主的心意里。我们要学习懂得主的心意。有时候，主的心意和命令是相违背的。父亲的心里有个心愿，但父亲的命令是不要儿子去完成那个心愿。你若是个孝子，你是照着父亲的心意作呢，还是照着父亲的命令作？　　保罗末了的行程就是这样。所以许多人读使徒行传，读到这里就觉得糊涂。一面主对保罗说，不要去（徒二一4，11~12）；一面主又站在保罗旁边，告诉他：“不要害怕。”（二七23~24）所以保罗末次的行程，到底是遵行神的旨意，还是违背神的旨意，这在神学上是一个大的讲究。神的命令是不要他去，但神的心愿是要他去。保罗在行动上，表面是违反了神的命令，但实际上是行在神的旨意里。
--------本段经节汇集--------
徒21:4  
我们找着了门徒，就在那里住了七天。他们借着那灵对保罗说，不要上耶路撒冷去。
徒21:11  
到了我们这里，就拿保罗的腰带，捆上自己的手脚，说，圣灵这样说，犹太人在耶路撒冷，要如此捆绑这腰带的主人，把他交在外邦人手里。
徒21:12  
我们听见这话，就和当地的人苦劝保罗不要上耶路撒冷去。
使徒行传一章（略，若需要被汇集，请勾选“不忽略整章”）
徒27:23  
因我所属所事奉的神，祂的使者昨夜站在我旁边，说，
徒27:24  
保罗，不要害怕，你必站在该撒面前，看哪，与你同船的人，神都赐给你了。
------------------------
　　所以，不要以主的命令作借口，要以主的心意为重。所有爱主的人，爱主到一个地步，都是超过命令的。只有这样的爱主，才能满足主的心。　　我们常盼望主的命令不是要求得这样高，事情就好办。然而许多时候，主的命令所要求的，还远不如祂的心意所要的。许多时候我们要说，“主，我不仅要遵行你的命令，更要超过你命令的要求。”保罗末了的行程，就是超过主的命令，活在主的心意里，所以主喜悦。主没有告诉保罗，要保罗去为祂作囚，反而主叫他不要去。然而主的心意，是愿意这爱祂的人，能为祂带锁链。所以，后来主就再对他说，“保罗，不要害怕，你必站在该撒面前。”（徒二七24）在此我们看见，并要抓牢一个事实：爱主的爱，要超过主的命令。凡人没有主的爱，都是避重拣轻的。但愿我们在事奉主的事上，都甘心拣选难的，逃避易的；拣选重的，逃避轻的。
--------本段经节汇集--------
徒27:24  
保罗，不要害怕，你必站在该撒面前，看哪，与你同船的人，神都赐给你了。
------------------------
　　原刊于一九六四年十二月“话语职事”第一百六十二期
　Scripture Reading: Acts 15:36-41; 16:6-7
　The leading in the work is not individual but corporate; it is a leading in the Body. Concerning this point, we need to read Acts 13 and pay particular attention to how the apostles worked and were led. After the ascension of the Lord Jesus, an important aspect of the disciples’ work on the earth involved their corporate leading; it is hard to find an example of anyone who was led individually or acted individually in Acts. Although it may seem as though Philip acted and was led individualistically in the gospel, the account in Acts shows that his leading was a part of the Lord’s corporate leading, which was confirmed by the Body (8:5-17).
　
NOT HAVING PERSONAL AFFECTION
　In the corporate leading in the work, we also must be careful not to bring personal affection into the work. In Acts 15 there was contention between Barnabas and Paul over the leading that they received. Although they both received the leading to visit the brothers, they differed on the matter of whether or not to take Mark. Barnabas insisted on taking Mark, but Paul did not consider it “suitable to take with them this one who withdrew from them in Pamphylia and did not go with them to the work” (v. 38).
　Based on the account in Acts, the record of this contention between the two seems simple, but Colossians 4:10, which identifies Mark as being a cousin of Barnabas, reveals the further complication. Barnabas and Mark were relatives, and Barnabas’s insistence that Mark be taken could easily have been influenced by family attachments and personal affection.
　When Barnabas, Paul, and Mark had gone out to work, they encountered difficulty at Pamphylia, and Mark withdrew (Acts 13:13). Mark’s withdrawal was unacceptable to Paul because it violated a principle related to spiritual warfare. Just as soldiers on the frontline of a battle should not withdraw, those who work for the Lord should not withdraw, because their withdrawal affects those who remain. It was good that Paul and Barnabas were not stumbled when Mark withdrew.
　Mark’s withdrawal, however, did affect Paul’s consideration when they were preparing to go out a second time. Paul felt that Mark needed to be disciplined by being restricted from going with them the second time. Paul’s willingness to restrict Mark from going was his execution of God’s government in the work. The Lord’s work cannot be carried out if a serving one acts according to his feeling, that is, if he works when he has a feeling to work and abandons the work when he has no feeling. Individuals cannot do as they please in the corporate move of the Lord’s work.
　Often the only way that a servant of the Lord can administer discipline is to first allow such ones to act according to their feelings but then to not allow them to later participate in the work according to their feeling. For example, Paul, Barnabas, and Mark were all led to participate in the work, but when Mark could not endure the suffering at Pamphylia, he withdrew. As a servant of the Lord, Paul could not force Mark to stay, but he could discipline Mark by not allowing him to go a second time. As a further example, if some brothers in a certain place do not want to receive my speaking, the only thing that I can do is to not go there to speak. In effect, my not going will be a discipline to them. In the Lord’s work discipline primarily involves not being allowed to participate in the work. When Mark withdrew, Paul did not stop him from going, but he also did not take Mark with him the next time. This was his discipline of Mark.
　Paul did not discipline Mark out of his flesh. Paul knew God well, and he upheld God’s governmental principle. Love and affection cannot be allowed to overthrow God’s government. God blesses what is according to His principle, and He does not bless what is not according to His principle. Paul’s unwillingness to take Mark the second time was an execution of God’s government according to the principle of God’s work.
　Barnabas, however, neglected God’s government and God’s principle in the work, and he allowed family affection to influence the work. Paul said that they should not take Mark, but Barnabas insisted on taking him. As a result, there was a sharp contention. As a serving one, Barnabas veered from the principle of God’s work by holding on to his personal feelings in his human relationships. Paul kept God’s principle, whereas Barnabas held on to his personal feelings. This was the source of their contention and separation.
　After their contention Barnabas took Mark and sailed away to Cyprus. There is, however, no mention of their being sent forth by the brothers (15:39). In contrast, verse 40 says, “Paul chose Silas and went out, having been commended to the grace of the Lord by the brothers.” When people contend, the wrong side always acts first, and the right side acts last. From reading this passage in the Bible, we know that the Holy Spirit judged Barnabas’s actions to be wrong. Despite the word from Paul and the other brothers, Barnabas took Mark with him. Although the Bible records that the brothers sent Paul and Silas forward, commending them to the grace of the Lord, there is no record of Barnabas being sent in this way. After Barnabas left, he was on his own. Although he no doubt continued to work, the Bible contains no further record of his work. From that point forward, Barnabas did not have the leading of the Holy Spirit.
　God’s principle can never be overlooked, and God’s government can never be compromised. We can only accommodate God; God does not accommodate us. We cannot lower God’s governmental standard to accommodate ourselves. We should conform to God’s principle; we should not expect God to conform to our feelings. Whenever our work is not according to God’s principle but according to our feelings, God will set us aside. Personal feelings must never be brought into the work of God.
　I have a heavy feeling within me based on years of serving the Lord with the brothers and sisters. In serving the Lord over the years, we have encountered the problem of personal feelings affecting the leading of many brothers and sisters. The source of personal feelings is personal affection. For example, there may be two brothers who have deep relations in the Lord. Nevertheless, whenever the co-workers seek the Lord’s leading together, it almost always seems as if these two brothers have a sense to work in various places together. Even if the co-workers feel that it is the Lord’s will for one brother to go but for the other to remain, the first brother will say that he cannot work if the other brother does not go as well. When the co-workers ask him to consider a different brother, he will say, “I am afraid that Brother So-and-so’s going may not be of the Lord.” Instead of saying, “His going may not be of the Lord,” which is a lie, he should be truthful and say, “His going does not suit me.”
　This problem is even more serious among the sisters. According to my observation, if two co-workers cannot be separated, they will eventually lose the Lord’s blessing. It is difficult for co-working sisters to acknowledge this; consequently, they argue, saying, “If the Lord Jesus sent out His disciples in pairs, there should be no problem with us going out in pairs.” Nevertheless, our history shows that if a pair of sisters cannot be separated, their work will be based only on human affection.
　I hope that the brothers and sisters will learn not to interact with their co-workers based on human affection. This matter must be dealt with completely; personal affections kill the Lord’s leading. It is not a simple thing for us to gather together and discuss the matter of our leading. If a co-worker says, “The Lord is leading me to Keelung, and it is best for Brother So-and-so to go with me,” he should have the full assurance that he is not acting out of personal affection. Personal feelings have no place in the work among the co-workers.
　No personal affection should be involved in our leading in the work or even in the work itself. Although a certain brother and I may be close, I must be willing to speak a strong word to him if he makes a mistake in the work. Only in this way will we have a clear and accurate leading in the work.
　We should never regard Barnabas’s actions toward Mark as trivial; they were based entirely on human affection. One day we will face the situation of Barnabas, so we need to take precautions. It is possible to have weaknesses and to make mistakes in the Lord’s work, but this does not mean that we have violated God’s government. However, whenever we bring in personal affections, we violate a governmental principle in the work. We must fear human affections more than falling, sinning, or making mistakes. Related to the work, personal affections are more serious than falling, sinning, or making mistakes. Personal affections will cause us to veer from the line of the Lord’s work.
　
NOT ANNULLING THE PERSONAL LEADING
　We also need to realize that the corporate leading in the work does not completely annul the Lord’s personal leading. For example, when the serving ones seek the Lord’s leading together, they may feel that a certain brother should go to Hualien, and, having the same feeling as the Body, he may go. If, after arriving in Hualien and praying, he feels to hold an eight-day gospel meeting, he does not need to check with us about this. This does not mean that he is acting individualistically; rather, he is being led personally, according to our corporate leading. Thus, the matter of personal leading is not annulled in the move of the work. As long as the brother is led by the Holy Spirit when he arrives in Hualien, he does not need to check with someone about every detail of the work. Sometimes it is not even possible to check with others. Can we even say that someone has the “higher” authority to answer his question? If a Christian mission work sent two missionaries to Hualien, their every action would first have to be reported to the mission board, but this would not make their actions to be according to the Lord’s leading.
　When Paul and Silas were led to go out, the brothers corporately sent them forward and commended them to the grace of the Lord (15:40). When they arrived in Asia, however, the Holy Spirit forbade them to stay (16:6). At this point they did not say, “The forbidding of the Holy Spirit is insufficient. We should write to the brothers in Antioch to see whether or not we should leave Asia.” This would have been wrong. In the work’s move there should be the freedom for the personal leading of the Spirit. When Paul and Silas left Asia, they tried to go into Bithynia, but again the Spirit of Jesus did not allow them. As a result, they went west to Troas (vv. 7-8) in the direction of the Holy Spirit’s leading and in the direction that corresponded to the allowance of the Spirit of Jesus. At this point “a vision appeared to Paul during the night: A certain man, a Macedonian, was standing and entreating him and saying, Come over into Macedonia and help us” (v. 9). Then they became clear, and the gospel was spread to Europe.
　In the fellowship among the local churches today, all the local churches, large or small, have equal standing before God. Even though some large local churches may be more experienced and may have been blessed more, they can only take the position of supporting the smaller churches, not of governing them.
　We need to be clear that our oneness is in fellowship, not in organizational hierarchy. The church has no headquarters or even branches. Some saints seem to feel that the church in Taipei is the “headquarters.” This is a delusion that, in part, is based on the fact that the co-workers often gather together in Taipei. For example, sometimes the co-working brothers and sisters come together for the sake of the work, which is not a matter related to the church in Taipei. Taipei is used only because it is convenient. However, when we call a co-workers’ meeting in Taipei, we often include the brothers from the church in Taipei in order to take care of them, but the saints should not think that this means that Taipei is our “headquarters.”
　However, this also does not mean that we can forsake the fellowship in the Body. If a small local church says, “We do not need to consult with the brothers from other local churches because our standing is the same as theirs,” we cannot say that this is wrong, but it is not sweet. The deeper the fellowship among us is, the better. Churches in various localities should stand before the Lord but also humbly consult with other churches to receive support and leading. If a co-worker who is led to a certain place can only tell others who his “boss” is, this is wrong. Nevertheless, it is good for him to learn to fellowship with other co-workers concerning his work so that he can receive a corporate confirmation.
　In our going out to propagate the Lord’s work, we need to be corporately led by the Lord in our service, yet we should learn to receive the Lord’s personal leading. We must be like Paul and Silas, who accepted the Holy Spirit’s forbidding and disallowing. Every worker of the Lord must learn this lesson as well as the lesson of fellowshipping with the local saints.
　We have no organization; we only have the leading to serve the Lord together in the church. If we leave one local church, we still need to be led by the Lord in another locality. We do not have organizational relationships, but we should have fellowship in all things at all times and in all places. In Taipei the co-workers should have fellowship with the brothers in Taipei, and in Hualien the co-workers should have fellowship with the brothers in Hualien.
　Forgive me for saying that the Western missionaries made a great mistake in their preaching of the gospel in China. They had the thought that the Chinese were too immature, and thus they did not fellowship with the Chinese saints. Instead, they checked with their mission boards in everything. According to the truth, after preaching the gospel in China and raising up native believers to serve the Lord, the missionaries should have sought the leading of the Lord with these brothers and sisters to determine how the work should be done. Similarly, we must fellowship with the saints in Taichung if we work in Taichung, and in fellowship we should look to the Lord concerning how to carry out His work in Taichung. We should not say, “We have been sent by the brothers. You are immature, so we will not include you in our fellowship.” This forsakes fellowship and upholds organization. There is no organization among us; there is only the fellowship that comes through serving the Lord together. We should fellowship at all times and in all places with the brothers and sisters who are with us according to the Lord’s arrangement.
　
RECEIVING THE BURDEN AT ANY TIME AND IN ANY PLACE
　The Lord’s serving ones must learn to receive a burden at any time and in any place. In Acts Paul often received a burden. Verse 36 of chapter 15 says, “Now after some days Paul said to Barnabas, Let us return now and visit the brothers in every city in which we announced the word of the Lord, and see how they are doing.” Then 17:16 says, “While Paul was waiting...in Athens, his spirit was provoked within him as he beheld that the city was full of idols.” Therefore, he wanted to preach the gospel in Athens.
　Many of the Lord’s serving ones today do not know how to receive a leading or a burden. The Lord’s leading may be present, but they do not have a clear sense of it. This is wrong. Every serving one of the Lord must endeavor to exercise to sense even the smallest burden.
　Sometimes I see some saints who are in need of help, but the serving ones around them act as though they see nothing and as if the situation of the saints is none of their concern. As serving ones of the Lord, we need to practice heeding the feeling within us so that we can receive a burden when we see a need. If our sense is not keen in this way, we will not have much of a future in serving the Lord.
　
THE MOVEMENT IN THE WORK BEING DIRECTED BY SENIOR ONES
　There is a major principle involved in the movement of brothers together in the work: All our movement in the work should be directed by senior brothers. For example, when Paul went out to work, he did not go out by himself but with other co-workers, including Barnabas, Silas, and later Timothy and Titus. Paul had at least four or five co-workers. Nevertheless, Paul did not have a group discussion whenever there was a need to move. Paul’s co-workers moved according to Paul’s arrangement and determination. Paul took the lead among his co-workers in making various arrangements. When he wanted Luke to stay, Luke stayed (2 Tim. 4:11); when he sent Timothy, Timothy would go (Acts 17:15; 1 Cor. 4:17). This is a major principle in the work: God desires that there be one head in the Lord’s work.
　When a man and a woman marry, only one head is visible at the wedding; the other is covered. If there is more than one head in a marriage, it will be a dreadful marriage. Whether in the past or in the present, whether here or in other places, women cover their heads when they marry. In a Chinese wedding only the man’s head is exposed. A person with one body and two heads would be a monster.
　In God’s government there should be only one head in the work—one head whether twenty co-workers are going out and one head whether two co-workers are going out. Peter took the lead among those working with him, and Paul took the lead among those working with him. God does not allow either a “dictatorship” or a “democracy” in the work. God only wants those who belong to Him to live in the Holy Spirit. In the worldly realm there is dictatorship, and there is also democracy, but in the church there is neither dictatorship nor democracy; there is only our learning to live in the Lord. When brothers and sisters are together, one or two must take the lead, but they should not dictate. Instead, they should make decisions based on the feelings that come from the brothers and sisters with them through fellowship.
　It would be wrong if the brothers working in Hualien called meetings to vote on everything. The proper way to make a decision is to meet together, pray together, and discuss things together. However, a final decision should be made by the leading brothers based on the feelings of the saints. Once a decision has been made, the other brothers and sisters should learn to obey.
　When Paul sent Timothy to Thessalonica (1 Thes. 3:2), Timothy did not say, “I have to wait for the Lord’s leading myself,” or “I will pray about it myself and see.” Whenever Paul sent Timothy, Timothy would go; whenever Paul sent Luke, Luke would go. A co-worker’s move in the work has to be based on submission to the leading ones in the work. God never lets anyone speak, move, or work freely in His work. When co-workers move freely, there is chaos.
　If the Lord establishes someone as a leading one in the work, he should learn to know God’s leading and God’s intention in all the co-workers and then make an accurate judgment. This is a necessary qualification for being a leading one. However, if we are not a leading one according to the Lord’s arrangement, we need to learn to obey the leading ones. Otherwise, the work will fall apart and be chaotic.
　This requires us to be spiritual. If a co-worker is not spiritual, he cannot lead the work, and if a co-worker has not learned the lessons, accepted the dealings, been subdued or broken, it will be difficult for him to obey others. There is authority and order in God’s government; He does not want chaos.
　
UNDERSTANDING THE LORD’S DESIRE
　We need to understand the Lord’s desire in relation to His command. We can see this in Paul’s experience at the end of Acts when he was put in prison. We must ask whether Paul’s imprisonment was according to the Lord’s command or His desire. There is no record in Acts of the Lord commanding or leading Paul to be imprisoned; rather, there is a record of the Holy Spirit, through the brothers, trying to stop him from going to Jerusalem, which eventually led to his imprisonment (21:4, 10-14). Paul was not imprisoned by the Lord’s leading. Rather, Paul’s imprisonment was the result of his great love for the Lord.
　The record of Acts shows that although the Lord wanted Paul to be in chains, He did not command him to be in chains. It is difficult to understand this seeming contradiction, but it can be likened to a father knowing that his desire for his son can be accomplished only through much suffering. Consequently, he will say, “Do not go,” even though his desire for his son remains. Paul loved the Lord so earnestly that if the Lord had commanded him not to go, he would have followed the Lord. Paul would have said, “If I go, my actions will be rash and against the Lord’s will.” Paul, however, not only lived according to the Lord’s command but also according to the Lord’s desire. We must learn to understand the Lord’s desire. At times the Lord’s desire may be the opposite of His command. The son’s accomplishment of a father’s desire often must come from more than a response to a command; it must come from an understanding and acceptance of the father’s desire. We must be willing to ask ourselves whether we are dutiful sons who act only according to a father’s commands or whether we are loving sons who respond to a father’s desires.
　Many are confused when they read about Paul’s final journey to Jerusalem. Through the brothers, Paul was told not to go (vv. 4, 11-12), yet he still went. In the night following the rioting of the Jews and Paul’s arrest, however, “the Lord stood by him and said, Take courage, for as you have solemnly testified to the things concerning Me in Jerusalem, so also you must testify in Rome” (23:11). After Paul appealed to Caesar, he encountered a storm on his way to Rome. At this point an angel of the Lord appeared to Paul and said, “Do not fear, Paul; you must stand before Caesar” (27:24). Whether Paul’s final journey to Jerusalem and his subsequent encounters were according to God’s will or against God’s will is a great question in theology. Seemingly, it was God’s command for him not to go, while at the same time, it was God’s desire that he would go. Paul’s move was apparently contrary to God’s command, but actually it was according to God’s will.
　Hence, we should not treat the Lord’s command as an excuse to avoid difficulties; satisfying the Lord’s desire is equally as important. All those who love the Lord should love Him to the point of exceeding His commands. Only such a love truly satisfies the Lord’s heart.
　We often wish that the Lord’s commands would not be so high in order that things would be easier, but requirements associated with the Lord’s command often are much lower than those associated with His desire. We must learn to be able to say, “Lord, I would not only keep Your commands but exceed the requirements of Your command.” Paul’s last journey exceeded the Lord’s command. He lived in the Lord’s desire, and this pleased the Lord. The Lord did not command Paul to be imprisoned for His sake, but it was His desire that such a lover of Him would be in chains for Him. Thus, the Lord encouraged him again and again. We must hold on to this fact: the love with which we love the Lord must exceed His command. Those who do not love the Lord in this way will avoid the weighty and choose the light. May we be willing to choose the difficult and avoid the easy and to choose the weighty and avoid the light in serving the Lord.
 
　　读经：使徒行传十五章三十六至四十一节，十六章六至七节。

　　关于工作上的引导，第一应当注意，受引导不是个人的，乃是在身体里，在团体里的。关于这点，圣徒们必须好好读行传头十三章，特别要注意使徒们当时如何同工，如何受工作上的引导。在主耶稣升天之后，门徒们在地上作工，其重要的点就是同受引导。你难得找出某个人单独的受引导，单独的行动。虽然腓利在福音上有过好像单独的行动和引导，但我们若好好读过使徒行传，会看见他的引导和行动，仍然不是单独的，乃是在团体里，是身体的（徒八5~17）。
 
　Scripture Reading: Acts 15:36-41; 16:6-7

　The leading in the work is not individual but corporate; it is a leading in the Body. Concerning this point, we need to read Acts 13 and pay particular attention to how the apostles worked and were led. After the ascension of the Lord Jesus, an important aspect of the disciples’ work on the earth involved their corporate leading; it is hard to find an example of anyone who was led individually or acted individually in Acts. Although it may seem as though Philip acted and was led individualistically in the gospel, the account in Acts shows that his leading was a part of the Lord’s corporate leading, which was confirmed by the Body (8:5-17).
　　关于受引导，第二点是要注意在工作上不能有个人的感情。在行传十五章，巴拿巴和保罗在受引导的事上，有了争执。这一次他们受引导，要往外去看望弟兄们。看望弟兄们，乃是他们共同的引导；但是在带不带马可这件事上，两个人有了不同。巴拿巴坚持要带马可，保罗却说不可（徒十五36~39）。

　　圣经对他们两个人的争执，记载得很简单，但从相关的经节可以看出，为什么巴拿巴说可，保罗说不可。歌罗西四章十节说到，马可是巴拿巴的表弟，可见巴拿巴和马可有亲戚关系。所以，这里自然可以有一个断定：巴拿巴主张非带马可去不可，可能有亲戚的情感掺杂在内。

　　当他们头一次出去作工时，马可曾经随着他们，但中途就退出了。为什么退出？因为遇到难处。他们到了旁非利亚，那里相当危险和艰难（徒十三13）。马可退去的这件事，是要不得的，因为在属灵争战上，这非常违反神的原则。在前线作战的军人，如何不可以临阵脱逃，为主作工的人也是如此。你若中途退去，可能同伴们就要受影响倒下去。还好，保罗和巴拿巴比较刚强，没有倒下。

　　因着马可那次的退去，保罗觉得必须给他惩治。所以，当他们第二次出门的时候，马可还要跟着去，保罗就说不可以。保罗说不可以，乃是执行神在工作上的一个管治。因为作主的工，不是人高兴就去，不高兴就不去。在工作上共同受引导，共同行动的时候，不能有自己个人的随便。

　　在此，附带的说，一个主的仆人惩治别人的错误，没有第二个办法，只有一个办法，就是不管他，不带他，不让他同工。比方，保罗、巴拿巴、马可三人同受引导去作工，到了旁非利亚，马可怕吃苦，受不了，中途退去。从人这面看，保罗没有办法对付他。他不能把马可的行装扣下，神的仆人不能作这事，只好下一次出门不带他。神的仆人没有别的方法可以惩治，只有不带他一途。比方，若是在某地，有弟兄一直说我讲的信息不好，我别无他法，只有一个办法，就是不再去那里，不再讲，不再说。这个不去、不讲、不说，就是对那地方的惩治。事奉主的人，在主的工作上从来只有一个“不”的惩罚。马可退去了，只好下次不带他。这个不带就是惩治。

　　保罗这样作并不是凭着他的血气，保罗相当认识神，他不能推翻神行政的原则。爱心不能推翻神的行政。合神的原则，神就祝福；不合神的原则，神就不祝福。所以保罗下一次不带马可，完全是站在神工作的原则上，执行神的行政。

　　然而，巴拿巴忽略了神的行政，忽略了神工作的原则，同时巴拿巴让亲戚的情感进入工作。保罗说不带马可，巴拿巴还是要带，二人就发生争执。这就是工人注重属人关系的感觉，而在神工作的原则上出了事。保罗始终站住神的原则，而巴拿巴始终主张自己的感觉，甚至两个人因此分裂了。

　　圣经给我们看见，争执过后，巴拿巴带着马可出门，并没有弟兄们给他送行（徒十五39）。圣经接着说，“保罗却拣选了西拉，也出去，蒙弟兄们把他交与主的恩典。”（40）当两人相争的时候，不对的那方定规先有行动，对的那方定规最后行动。我们读那段圣经就可以知道，圣灵判断巴拿巴是错的。争执过后，巴拿巴不管保罗怎样说，也不管弟兄们怎样说，还是带着马可走。然而他走的时候，没有人给他送行。但圣经却记载，弟兄们给保罗和西拉送行，把他们交与主的恩典。从这时候起，巴拿巴就落到单独里了。他还作工，还是使徒，但圣经不记载他的工作。从这里开始，巴拿巴就从圣灵的引导里落下去了。

　　神的原则是丝毫不苟且的，神的行政是丝毫不容让的。人只能就祂，祂不能就人。人不能把神的行政拖来就人，人只能照着神的原则，不能叫祂照着人的感觉。什么时候人不照祂的原则，而照自己的感觉作工，祂就把人丢在一边。在神的工作上，绝对不能把个人的感觉带进来。

　　我里面有个很重的感觉，是多年和弟兄姊妹一同事奉主，所产生出来的。多年来，我和弟兄姊妹事奉主，所碰到的一个难处，就是大家一同受引导时，许多人有个人的感觉。这种所谓的个人感觉，就是私人的情感。比方，有两位弟兄平日很谈得来，非常投机，两人在主里交情很深。当多位同工一起寻求引导时，很希奇，十次有八次，他们二人都觉得应该一同去某地作工。然而其他人觉得，这位弟兄去可能有主的意思，但那位弟兄去太勉强。这位弟兄却说，那位弟兄如果不去，他就无法作工。同工们就说，“如果你一个人去觉得孤单，好不好另外某弟兄和你同去？”这位弟兄又说，某弟兄去恐怕不是合乎主的。这个“恐怕不是合乎主的”，是谎话，应该说，“跟我合不来。”

　　今天，这个难处在姊妹们身上更严重。根据观察，凡是两个同工不能拆开的，结果没有主的祝福。同工姊妹们常是一对一对在一起，声辩说，“当初主耶稣差遣门徒的时候，岂不也是一对一对的么？我们出门不也该一对一对么？”然而事实证明，到了一个时候，一对姊妹拆不开，就是有了人的感情。

　　盼望弟兄姊妹要学习一件事，在同工们中没有人情的感觉。这事必须对付得干干净净；个人的感情非常杀死引导。若是我们众人聚集在一起，谈我们的引导，这不是一件简单的事。若是你说，主引导我去基隆，并且最好是某某弟兄和我同去。你能保证其中百分之百没有个人的感情么？个人的感觉在工作上，在同工中间，必须对付得干干净净。

　　不只在受引导的事上，即使在工作的事上，也不能有个人的感情。虽然某弟兄和我个人感情最好，但是在工作上，他有错误，我还得对他说厉害的话。这样，你在工作的引导上，才能看得清楚，看得准确。

　　千万不要把巴拿巴带马可的事，当作无关紧要，这完全是人的感情。有一天你会看见，巴拿巴里面的难处，在你里面也有。我提起这一点，是为防患未然。等你发现自己里面有这情形时，你要定罪这事，拒绝这事。

　　在主的工作上，人可以有弱点，可以有错误；这还不一定违反主工作上的行政。但什么时候人把私人感情带进来，就违反主工作行政的原则。我们要怕个人的感情，过于害怕跌倒、犯罪或作错。在工作的原则上，个人的感情比我们跌倒、犯罪、作错还要严重。这个会叫我们离开工作的路线。
 
　In the corporate leading in the work, we also must be careful not to bring personal affection into the work. In Acts 15 there was contention between Barnabas and Paul over the leading that they received. Although they both received the leading to visit the brothers, they differed on the matter of whether or not to take Mark. Barnabas insisted on taking Mark, but Paul did not consider it “suitable to take with them this one who withdrew from them in Pamphylia and did not go with them to the work” (v. 38).

　Based on the account in Acts, the record of this contention between the two seems simple, but Colossians 4:10, which identifies Mark as being a cousin of Barnabas, reveals the further complication. Barnabas and Mark were relatives, and Barnabas’s insistence that Mark be taken could easily have been influenced by family attachments and personal affection.

　When Barnabas, Paul, and Mark had gone out to work, they encountered difficulty at Pamphylia, and Mark withdrew (Acts 13:13). Mark’s withdrawal was unacceptable to Paul because it violated a principle related to spiritual warfare. Just as soldiers on the frontline of a battle should not withdraw, those who work for the Lord should not withdraw, because their withdrawal affects those who remain. It was good that Paul and Barnabas were not stumbled when Mark withdrew.

　Mark’s withdrawal, however, did affect Paul’s consideration when they were preparing to go out a second time. Paul felt that Mark needed to be disciplined by being restricted from going with them the second time. Paul’s willingness to restrict Mark from going was his execution of God’s government in the work. The Lord’s work cannot be carried out if a serving one acts according to his feeling, that is, if he works when he has a feeling to work and abandons the work when he has no feeling. Individuals cannot do as they please in the corporate move of the Lord’s work.

　Often the only way that a servant of the Lord can administer discipline is to first allow such ones to act according to their feelings but then to not allow them to later participate in the work according to their feeling. For example, Paul, Barnabas, and Mark were all led to participate in the work, but when Mark could not endure the suffering at Pamphylia, he withdrew. As a servant of the Lord, Paul could not force Mark to stay, but he could discipline Mark by not allowing him to go a second time. As a further example, if some brothers in a certain place do not want to receive my speaking, the only thing that I can do is to not go there to speak. In effect, my not going will be a discipline to them. In the Lord’s work discipline primarily involves not being allowed to participate in the work. When Mark withdrew, Paul did not stop him from going, but he also did not take Mark with him the next time. This was his discipline of Mark.

　Paul did not discipline Mark out of his flesh. Paul knew God well, and he upheld God’s governmental principle. Love and affection cannot be allowed to overthrow God’s government. God blesses what is according to His principle, and He does not bless what is not according to His principle. Paul’s unwillingness to take Mark the second time was an execution of God’s government according to the principle of God’s work.

　Barnabas, however, neglected God’s government and God’s principle in the work, and he allowed family affection to influence the work. Paul said that they should not take Mark, but Barnabas insisted on taking him. As a result, there was a sharp contention. As a serving one, Barnabas veered from the principle of God’s work by holding on to his personal feelings in his human relationships. Paul kept God’s principle, whereas Barnabas held on to his personal feelings. This was the source of their contention and separation.

　After their contention Barnabas took Mark and sailed away to Cyprus. There is, however, no mention of their being sent forth by the brothers (15:39). In contrast, verse 40 says, “Paul chose Silas and went out, having been commended to the grace of the Lord by the brothers.” When people contend, the wrong side always acts first, and the right side acts last. From reading this passage in the Bible, we know that the Holy Spirit judged Barnabas’s actions to be wrong. Despite the word from Paul and the other brothers, Barnabas took Mark with him. Although the Bible records that the brothers sent Paul and Silas forward, commending them to the grace of the Lord, there is no record of Barnabas being sent in this way. After Barnabas left, he was on his own. Although he no doubt continued to work, the Bible contains no further record of his work. From that point forward, Barnabas did not have the leading of the Holy Spirit.

　God’s principle can never be overlooked, and God’s government can never be compromised. We can only accommodate God; God does not accommodate us. We cannot lower God’s governmental standard to accommodate ourselves. We should conform to God’s principle; we should not expect God to conform to our feelings. Whenever our work is not according to God’s principle but according to our feelings, God will set us aside. Personal feelings must never be brought into the work of God.

　I have a heavy feeling within me based on years of serving the Lord with the brothers and sisters. In serving the Lord over the years, we have encountered the problem of personal feelings affecting the leading of many brothers and sisters. The source of personal feelings is personal affection. For example, there may be two brothers who have deep relations in the Lord. Nevertheless, whenever the co-workers seek the Lord’s leading together, it almost always seems as if these two brothers have a sense to work in various places together. Even if the co-workers feel that it is the Lord’s will for one brother to go but for the other to remain, the first brother will say that he cannot work if the other brother does not go as well. When the co-workers ask him to consider a different brother, he will say, “I am afraid that Brother So-and-so’s going may not be of the Lord.” Instead of saying, “His going may not be of the Lord,” which is a lie, he should be truthful and say, “His going does not suit me.”

　This problem is even more serious among the sisters. According to my observation, if two co-workers cannot be separated, they will eventually lose the Lord’s blessing. It is difficult for co-working sisters to acknowledge this; consequently, they argue, saying, “If the Lord Jesus sent out His disciples in pairs, there should be no problem with us going out in pairs.” Nevertheless, our history shows that if a pair of sisters cannot be separated, their work will be based only on human affection.

　I hope that the brothers and sisters will learn not to interact with their co-workers based on human affection. This matter must be dealt with completely; personal affections kill the Lord’s leading. It is not a simple thing for us to gather together and discuss the matter of our leading. If a co-worker says, “The Lord is leading me to Keelung, and it is best for Brother So-and-so to go with me,” he should have the full assurance that he is not acting out of personal affection. Personal feelings have no place in the work among the co-workers.

　No personal affection should be involved in our leading in the work or even in the work itself. Although a certain brother and I may be close, I must be willing to speak a strong word to him if he makes a mistake in the work. Only in this way will we have a clear and accurate leading in the work.

　We should never regard Barnabas’s actions toward Mark as trivial; they were based entirely on human affection. One day we will face the situation of Barnabas, so we need to take precautions. It is possible to have weaknesses and to make mistakes in the Lord’s work, but this does not mean that we have violated God’s government. However, whenever we bring in personal affections, we violate a governmental principle in the work. We must fear human affections more than falling, sinning, or making mistakes. Related to the work, personal affections are more serious than falling, sinning, or making mistakes. Personal affections will cause us to veer from the line of the Lord’s work.
　　第三，工作的引导虽然是团体的，却不会完全抹煞个人受的引导。比方，我们一同事奉主的人，大家在一起寻求，觉得某弟兄应该去花莲，他在身体里的感觉也是如此，结果他就去了。他到了花莲，经过两周的祷告，觉得该有八天的布道会，他需不需要打电报来请示我们呢？并不需要。那么他是不是单独行动？绝对不是。在这里我们要看见，虽然我们是共同受引导，但是在工作的行动上，不能把个人受引导的事完全抹煞。当那位弟兄到了花莲，只要圣灵给他引导，他就可以作，不必来请示。况且，他若要请示，该向谁请示？是不是有一个上级机关，接受他的请示？绝对没有。今日基督教里的差会，若是派了两个传教士到花莲，他们在花莲的每一个工作行动，都要报告请示差会。然而在主的引导中，这是不对的。

　　保罗和西拉在弟兄们中间受引导往外去，弟兄们给他们送行，把他们交在主的恩典中（徒十五40）。之后，保罗和西拉到了亚西亚，他们想留在亚西亚，但圣灵禁止他们（十六6）。这时，他们是否还要说，“有圣灵的禁止还不够，我们要写信问安提阿的弟兄们，是否答应我们离开亚西亚？”他们若这样作就错了。他们在工作的行动上，应当有个人受引导的自由。然后，他们觉得应该离开亚西亚，当他们要往庇推尼去时，耶稣的灵又不许。结果他们只好往西走，来到特罗亚（7~8）。圣灵没有禁止，耶稣的灵也没有不许他们往那里，反而圣灵在夜间给保罗看见异象，有一个人站着求他说，“请你过到马其顿来帮助我们。”（9）这时他们就清楚了；福音就是这样传到了欧洲。

　　今天众地方召会之间的交通，也是这样。所有的地方召会，无论大小，在神面前的地位都是相等的。虽然有些大的地方召会比较老练，蒙恩多一点，但是大召会永远只能站在扶持小召会的地位，不能站在管治小召会的地位。

　　我们要清楚一件事，我们只有交通里的合一，没有组织上的阶层。召会没有一个总会，更没有分会。有的圣徒似乎有一种感觉，觉得台北召会是总会。这个错觉是因为：第一，台北是同工们集中的地方。比方，有时我们召集同工弟兄姊妹，这不是召会的事，是同工们的事，不过是采用台北这个地点，因为这里的召会大，许多事方便作。第二，当我们在台北召开同工聚会，因为台北召会就在这里，我们把他们也包括进来了。这是我们顾到台北而有的一个措施，但众圣徒不该把台北召会当作一个总会。

　　另一面，我们不能忽略在身体里的交通。若是一个小地方召会说，“我们和大地方召会的地位一样，为什么要请教他们？”这种态度虽不能说错，但十分不美。在我们中间，交通的关系应该越深越好。各地召会一面该一同站在主面前，另一面也该谦卑的请教别地召会，得一点扶助，得一点带领。一面来说，一位同工受引导到一个地方，不能只会看什么人是他的顶头上司，这是错误的；但另一面，他也该学习把他的工作交通给同工们，好得着同工们的印证，这是好事。

　　所以我们要看见，我们出门开展主的工作，在事奉上要共同受主的引导，但是当我们作的时候，还得学习个人受主引导，不能倚靠别人。我们必须像保罗和西拉一样，接受圣灵的禁止和不许。这是每一个为主作工的人，都得学习的。另一面，还得与当地的圣徒一同有交通，一同受引导。

　　盼望大家看见，我们没有组织，只有引导，共同学习在召会里一同事奉神。你若是离开这个地方召会，你还要在另一地和人一同受主引导。我们没有组织上的关系，但我们该凡事有交通，随时随地有交通。你在台北，就和台北的弟兄有交通；你在花莲，就和在花莲的弟兄有交通。

　　原谅我说，当初西教士到中国传福音，犯了一个大错。他们有个错误的观念，以为中国人太幼稚，所以不和中国圣徒交通，凡事都请示他们本国差会。按照真理，他们在中国传福音，有本地人得救，起来事奉主了，他们就该和这些弟兄姊妹一同寻求主，来断定他们的工作该怎么作。比方，你们在台中作工，就必须和台中的圣徒有交通，在那个交通里，看主的工作在台中该怎样作。你们不能说，“我们是弟兄们打发来的，你们很幼稚，我们不管你们。”这是放弃交通，持守组织。我们中间没有组织，只有交通，而交通乃是和一同事奉主的人交通。我们是随时随地，和主所安排的弟兄姊妹一同有交通。
 
　We also need to realize that the corporate leading in the work does not completely annul the Lord’s personal leading. For example, when the serving ones seek the Lord’s leading together, they may feel that a certain brother should go to Hualien, and, having the same feeling as the Body, he may go. If, after arriving in Hualien and praying, he feels to hold an eight-day gospel meeting, he does not need to check with us about this. This does not mean that he is acting individualistically; rather, he is being led personally, according to our corporate leading. Thus, the matter of personal leading is not annulled in the move of the work. As long as the brother is led by the Holy Spirit when he arrives in Hualien, he does not need to check with someone about every detail of the work. Sometimes it is not even possible to check with others. Can we even say that someone has the “higher” authority to answer his question? If a Christian mission work sent two missionaries to Hualien, their every action would first have to be reported to the mission board, but this would not make their actions to be according to the Lord’s leading.

　When Paul and Silas were led to go out, the brothers corporately sent them forward and commended them to the grace of the Lord (15:40). When they arrived in Asia, however, the Holy Spirit forbade them to stay (16:6). At this point they did not say, “The forbidding of the Holy Spirit is insufficient. We should write to the brothers in Antioch to see whether or not we should leave Asia.” This would have been wrong. In the work’s move there should be the freedom for the personal leading of the Spirit. When Paul and Silas left Asia, they tried to go into Bithynia, but again the Spirit of Jesus did not allow them. As a result, they went west to Troas (vv. 7-8) in the direction of the Holy Spirit’s leading and in the direction that corresponded to the allowance of the Spirit of Jesus. At this point “a vision appeared to Paul during the night: A certain man, a Macedonian, was standing and entreating him and saying, Come over into Macedonia and help us” (v. 9). Then they became clear, and the gospel was spread to Europe.

　In the fellowship among the local churches today, all the local churches, large or small, have equal standing before God. Even though some large local churches may be more experienced and may have been blessed more, they can only take the position of supporting the smaller churches, not of governing them.

　We need to be clear that our oneness is in fellowship, not in organizational hierarchy. The church has no headquarters or even branches. Some saints seem to feel that the church in Taipei is the “headquarters.” This is a delusion that, in part, is based on the fact that the co-workers often gather together in Taipei. For example, sometimes the co-working brothers and sisters come together for the sake of the work, which is not a matter related to the church in Taipei. Taipei is used only because it is convenient. However, when we call a co-workers’ meeting in Taipei, we often include the brothers from the church in Taipei in order to take care of them, but the saints should not think that this means that Taipei is our “headquarters.”

　However, this also does not mean that we can forsake the fellowship in the Body. If a small local church says, “We do not need to consult with the brothers from other local churches because our standing is the same as theirs,” we cannot say that this is wrong, but it is not sweet. The deeper the fellowship among us is, the better. Churches in various localities should stand before the Lord but also humbly consult with other churches to receive support and leading. If a co-worker who is led to a certain place can only tell others who his “boss” is, this is wrong. Nevertheless, it is good for him to learn to fellowship with other co-workers concerning his work so that he can receive a corporate confirmation.

　In our going out to propagate the Lord’s work, we need to be corporately led by the Lord in our service, yet we should learn to receive the Lord’s personal leading. We must be like Paul and Silas, who accepted the Holy Spirit’s forbidding and disallowing. Every worker of the Lord must learn this lesson as well as the lesson of fellowshipping with the local saints.

　We have no organization; we only have the leading to serve the Lord together in the church. If we leave one local church, we still need to be led by the Lord in another locality. We do not have organizational relationships, but we should have fellowship in all things at all times and in all places. In Taipei the co-workers should have fellowship with the brothers in Taipei, and in Hualien the co-workers should have fellowship with the brothers in Hualien.

　Forgive me for saying that the Western missionaries made a great mistake in their preaching of the gospel in China. They had the thought that the Chinese were too immature, and thus they did not fellowship with the Chinese saints. Instead, they checked with their mission boards in everything. According to the truth, after preaching the gospel in China and raising up native believers to serve the Lord, the missionaries should have sought the leading of the Lord with these brothers and sisters to determine how the work should be done. Similarly, we must fellowship with the saints in Taichung if we work in Taichung, and in fellowship we should look to the Lord concerning how to carry out His work in Taichung. We should not say, “We have been sent by the brothers. You are immature, so we will not include you in our fellowship.” This forsakes fellowship and upholds organization. There is no organization among us; there is only the fellowship that comes through serving the Lord together. We should fellowship at all times and in all places with the brothers and sisters who are with us according to the Lord’s arrangement.
　　第四，一个事奉主的人，应该学习随时随地接受负担。从使徒行传可以看见，保罗这个人常常能接受负担。十五章三十六节记载：“保罗对巴拿巴说，我们要回到从前宣传主话的各城，看望弟兄们的景况如何。”十七章十六节又说，“保罗在雅典等候…的时候，看见满城都是偶像，他里面的灵就受到激愤。”于是，他想要在雅典好好传福音。

　　今天好些事奉主的人不会受引导，不会接受负担。引导摆在他面前，他还没有感觉。这种现象非常不对。每一个事奉主的人，在这事上都要好好操练，操练到一个地步，只要有一点负担就能感觉得到。

　　有时，我看见有的圣徒实在很幼稚，需要帮助，但是周围事奉主的人，在旁边视若无睹，好像这不是他的事。事奉主的人都要操练留意里面的感觉，一看见需要，里面就有负担。如果你的感觉不够敏锐，你在事奉主的事上就没有多少前途。
 
　The Lord’s serving ones must learn to receive a burden at any time and in any place. In Acts Paul often received a burden. Verse 36 of chapter 15 says, “Now after some days Paul said to Barnabas, Let us return now and visit the brothers in every city in which we announced the word of the Lord, and see how they are doing.” Then 17:16 says, “While Paul was waiting...in Athens, his spirit was provoked within him as he beheld that the city was full of idols.” Therefore, he wanted to preach the gospel in Athens.

　Many of the Lord’s serving ones today do not know how to receive a leading or a burden. The Lord’s leading may be present, but they do not have a clear sense of it. This is wrong. Every serving one of the Lord must endeavor to exercise to sense even the smallest burden.

　Sometimes I see some saints who are in need of help, but the serving ones around them act as though they see nothing and as if the situation of the saints is none of their concern. As serving ones of the Lord, we need to practice heeding the feeling within us so that we can receive a burden when we see a need. If our sense is not keen in this way, we will not have much of a future in serving the Lord.
　　第五，在工作上几个人一同行动时，有一个很大的原则，就是他们的行动都是由前头弟兄主持。比方，保罗出去作工，并不是他一个人作，常有同工一起去。起先有巴拿巴，然后有西拉，以后有提摩太，后来有提多加进来，起码有四、五位同工。然而我们没有看到，保罗每一次有行动时，会先把所有工人召来开一个会，大家商议怎样作。反而都是保罗在安排，在断定。保罗是那个工作队里的领头，什么都是由领头安排。他要留路加在那里，路加就留在那里（提后四11）；他要打发提摩太到那里，提摩太就到那里（徒十七15，林前四17）。这也是工作的一个大原则。在主的工作里，任何一个场合，神只要一个头。

　　男女双方结婚，举行婚礼时，我们可以看见只有一个头，另一个头藏起来了。请记得，结婚若不是两个人只有一个头，那个婚姻定规是可怕的。无论古今中外，女人结婚时都是蒙头的。中国人的婚礼，也是只有男人把头露出来。你若看见一个一体两头的生物，那就是怪物。

　　在神的行政里，任何场合都只有一个头。二十个同工出门是一个头，两个同工出门也是一个头。使徒行传给我们看见，在彼得那个工作队里，彼得是头；在保罗那个工作队里，保罗是头。神从来不让人独裁，也从来不让人民主，神只要属乎祂的人都活在圣灵里。世上的政权有独裁，也有民主，但是召会里没有独裁，也没有民主，只有学习活在主里面。许多弟兄姊妹在一起时，总有一两位在前头，但不是由这一两位独裁定规，他们乃是根据旁边许多弟兄姊妹的感觉来定规。

　　比方，几位弟兄在花莲作工，如果遇事都用开会表决的方式定规，那就错了。该怎样定规呢？大家开会是对的，一同祷告谈论是对的，但最终该由领头弟兄根据许多圣徒里面的感觉作断定。一有了断定，弟兄姊妹都该学习顺服。

　　当保罗打发提摩太到帖撒罗尼迦时（帖前三2），提摩太没有说，“我要自己等候主的引导。”或者说，“我要自己祷告祷告看看。”保罗打发提摩太到那里，提摩太就到那里；保罗打发路加到那里，路加就到那里。一个在工作里行动的人，都得顺服那个工作里带领的人。在神的工作里，神从来不让人随便说，随便来，随便作工。行动一随便，就乱了。

　　我们要看见，我们在工作上一同行动时，主若是设立你作带领的人，你应该学习认识神在同工们身上所有的引导，认识神在他们身上所有的用意，然后作一个准确的判断，这样才有资格作带领的人。另一面，你若不是主所安排带领的人，你就得学习顺服前头带领的人。不然，那个工作定规会散、会乱。

　　这要求我们属灵。弟兄如果不属灵，作不了头。另一面，同工们如果没有学习，没有接受对付，没有被折服，没有受破碎，也难顺服另外一人。在神的行政里，都是权柄，都是等次，祂不要祂的行政里有混乱。
 
　There is a major principle involved in the movement of brothers together in the work: All our movement in the work should be directed by senior brothers. For example, when Paul went out to work, he did not go out by himself but with other co-workers, including Barnabas, Silas, and later Timothy and Titus. Paul had at least four or five co-workers. Nevertheless, Paul did not have a group discussion whenever there was a need to move. Paul’s co-workers moved according to Paul’s arrangement and determination. Paul took the lead among his co-workers in making various arrangements. When he wanted Luke to stay, Luke stayed (2 Tim. 4:11); when he sent Timothy, Timothy would go (Acts 17:15; 1 Cor. 4:17). This is a major principle in the work: God desires that there be one head in the Lord’s work.

　When a man and a woman marry, only one head is visible at the wedding; the other is covered. If there is more than one head in a marriage, it will be a dreadful marriage. Whether in the past or in the present, whether here or in other places, women cover their heads when they marry. In a Chinese wedding only the man’s head is exposed. A person with one body and two heads would be a monster.

　In God’s government there should be only one head in the work—one head whether twenty co-workers are going out and one head whether two co-workers are going out. Peter took the lead among those working with him, and Paul took the lead among those working with him. God does not allow either a “dictatorship” or a “democracy” in the work. God only wants those who belong to Him to live in the Holy Spirit. In the worldly realm there is dictatorship, and there is also democracy, but in the church there is neither dictatorship nor democracy; there is only our learning to live in the Lord. When brothers and sisters are together, one or two must take the lead, but they should not dictate. Instead, they should make decisions based on the feelings that come from the brothers and sisters with them through fellowship.

　It would be wrong if the brothers working in Hualien called meetings to vote on everything. The proper way to make a decision is to meet together, pray together, and discuss things together. However, a final decision should be made by the leading brothers based on the feelings of the saints. Once a decision has been made, the other brothers and sisters should learn to obey.

　When Paul sent Timothy to Thessalonica (1 Thes. 3:2), Timothy did not say, “I have to wait for the Lord’s leading myself,” or “I will pray about it myself and see.” Whenever Paul sent Timothy, Timothy would go; whenever Paul sent Luke, Luke would go. A co-worker’s move in the work has to be based on submission to the leading ones in the work. God never lets anyone speak, move, or work freely in His work. When co-workers move freely, there is chaos.

　If the Lord establishes someone as a leading one in the work, he should learn to know God’s leading and God’s intention in all the co-workers and then make an accurate judgment. This is a necessary qualification for being a leading one. However, if we are not a leading one according to the Lord’s arrangement, we need to learn to obey the leading ones. Otherwise, the work will fall apart and be chaotic.

　This requires us to be spiritual. If a co-worker is not spiritual, he cannot lead the work, and if a co-worker has not learned the lessons, accepted the dealings, been subdued or broken, it will be difficult for him to obey others. There is authority and order in God’s government; He does not want chaos.
　　第六，就是我们要懂得主的心意。我们知道，保罗这个人末了是被下到监狱里。请问，保罗下监，是主要他去的呢，还是他自己去的？你读使徒行传能不能读出，是主引导保罗下监的？这很难读出来。保罗不是受主引导而下监的。圣灵反倒借着人拦阻他，叫他不要去（徒二一4，10~14）。那么，他为什么被下监？乃是他爱主爱到一个地步，甘心乐意的。

　　然而，这是不是主愿意保罗去带锁链呢？这一点，主是愿意的。那么，既是如此，主为什么不引导保罗？这问题很难答。就好像父亲有一个心愿，儿子若要去完成，要吃很大的苦，因此父亲就说，“你不要去。”但是在父亲心里，其实是有个心愿的。这是一件很矛盾的事。保罗最终就是这样。若是保罗对主的爱不够热切，主一拦阻，他马上就不去了，并且他或许也能说，“我去是轻举妄动，我不去是遵行主的旨意。”然而，保罗不仅活在主的命令里，他也活在主的心意里。我们要学习懂得主的心意。有时候，主的心意和命令是相违背的。父亲的心里有个心愿，但父亲的命令是不要儿子去完成那个心愿。你若是个孝子，你是照着父亲的心意作呢，还是照着父亲的命令作？

　　保罗末了的行程就是这样。所以许多人读使徒行传，读到这里就觉得糊涂。一面主对保罗说，不要去（徒二一4，11~12）；一面主又站在保罗旁边，告诉他：“不要害怕。”（二七23~24）所以保罗末次的行程，到底是遵行神的旨意，还是违背神的旨意，这在神学上是一个大的讲究。神的命令是不要他去，但神的心愿是要他去。保罗在行动上，表面是违反了神的命令，但实际上是行在神的旨意里。

　　所以，不要以主的命令作借口，要以主的心意为重。所有爱主的人，爱主到一个地步，都是超过命令的。只有这样的爱主，才能满足主的心。

　　我们常盼望主的命令不是要求得这样高，事情就好办。然而许多时候，主的命令所要求的，还远不如祂的心意所要的。许多时候我们要说，“主，我不仅要遵行你的命令，更要超过你命令的要求。”保罗末了的行程，就是超过主的命令，活在主的心意里，所以主喜悦。主没有告诉保罗，要保罗去为祂作囚，反而主叫他不要去。然而主的心意，是愿意这爱祂的人，能为祂带锁链。所以，后来主就再对他说，“保罗，不要害怕，你必站在该撒面前。”（徒二七24）在此我们看见，并要抓牢一个事实：爱主的爱，要超过主的命令。凡人没有主的爱，都是避重拣轻的。但愿我们在事奉主的事上，都甘心拣选难的，逃避易的；拣选重的，逃避轻的。

　　原刊于一九六四年十二月“话语职事”第一百六十二期
 
　We need to understand the Lord’s desire in relation to His command. We can see this in Paul’s experience at the end of Acts when he was put in prison. We must ask whether Paul’s imprisonment was according to the Lord’s command or His desire. There is no record in Acts of the Lord commanding or leading Paul to be imprisoned; rather, there is a record of the Holy Spirit, through the brothers, trying to stop him from going to Jerusalem, which eventually led to his imprisonment (21:4, 10-14). Paul was not imprisoned by the Lord’s leading. Rather, Paul’s imprisonment was the result of his great love for the Lord.

　The record of Acts shows that although the Lord wanted Paul to be in chains, He did not command him to be in chains. It is difficult to understand this seeming contradiction, but it can be likened to a father knowing that his desire for his son can be accomplished only through much suffering. Consequently, he will say, “Do not go,” even though his desire for his son remains. Paul loved the Lord so earnestly that if the Lord had commanded him not to go, he would have followed the Lord. Paul would have said, “If I go, my actions will be rash and against the Lord’s will.” Paul, however, not only lived according to the Lord’s command but also according to the Lord’s desire. We must learn to understand the Lord’s desire. At times the Lord’s desire may be the opposite of His command. The son’s accomplishment of a father’s desire often must come from more than a response to a command; it must come from an understanding and acceptance of the father’s desire. We must be willing to ask ourselves whether we are dutiful sons who act only according to a father’s commands or whether we are loving sons who respond to a father’s desires.

　Many are confused when they read about Paul’s final journey to Jerusalem. Through the brothers, Paul was told not to go (vv. 4, 11-12), yet he still went. In the night following the rioting of the Jews and Paul’s arrest, however, “the Lord stood by him and said, Take courage, for as you have solemnly testified to the things concerning Me in Jerusalem, so also you must testify in Rome” (23:11). After Paul appealed to Caesar, he encountered a storm on his way to Rome. At this point an angel of the Lord appeared to Paul and said, “Do not fear, Paul; you must stand before Caesar” (27:24). Whether Paul’s final journey to Jerusalem and his subsequent encounters were according to God’s will or against God’s will is a great question in theology. Seemingly, it was God’s command for him not to go, while at the same time, it was God’s desire that he would go. Paul’s move was apparently contrary to God’s command, but actually it was according to God’s will.

　Hence, we should not treat the Lord’s command as an excuse to avoid difficulties; satisfying the Lord’s desire is equally as important. All those who love the Lord should love Him to the point of exceeding His commands. Only such a love truly satisfies the Lord’s heart.

　We often wish that the Lord’s commands would not be so high in order that things would be easier, but requirements associated with the Lord’s command often are much lower than those associated with His desire. We must learn to be able to say, “Lord, I would not only keep Your commands but exceed the requirements of Your command.” Paul’s last journey exceeded the Lord’s command. He lived in the Lord’s desire, and this pleased the Lord. The Lord did not command Paul to be imprisoned for His sake, but it was His desire that such a lover of Him would be in chains for Him. Thus, the Lord encouraged him again and again. We must hold on to this fact: the love with which we love the Lord must exceed His command. Those who do not love the Lord in this way will avoid the weighty and choose the light. May we be willing to choose the difficult and avoid the easy and to choose the weighty and avoid the light in serving the Lord.

返回事奉主者的异象、职事与引导 ｜ 返回事奉类首页