Can I question some things I hear, in our Charismatic movement?

[Frogster]

This non-inflammatory post, it is broad, and general, not directed at anyone on our forum, but to the events in the movement, and the debate in the movement.


Often when I, or others challenge or doubt, a prophecy, a person, or miraculous stories, we are met with with, sorry, but what I now view as redundant reply.

The person not liking what I say, will reply by saying…”there are miracles in the Bible!”

To that I say, sure, but we know they are true, because they are in the Bible. But why does that mean I or others can’t doubt, or question, some of these, elaborate stories, just because there are miracles in the bible?


There are quite a few texts to prove that people, in the church, “from your own number”, men (and I guess women) will arise, and be wolves, and the motive is shown, to draw disciples for themselves. What better way to do that, gather disciples, than present yourself, as this super powerful person, with all kinds of great secrets to the higher spiritual life?


Acts 20:29 I know that after my departure fierce wolves will come in among you, not sparing the flock; 30 and from among your own selves will arise men speaking twisted things, to draw away the disciples after them.

Serving their own appetites, preying on the naïve, who believe everything, usually young converts, are often awed by flattery, as some sell prophecies, or certainly free style wield them around, a little to quickly, in my opinion..

Rom 16:18 For such persons do not serve our Lord Christ, but their own appetites, and by smooth talk and flattery they deceive the hearts of the naive.

Said by Peter also, making up stories, and greed is the motive, as they collect funds, and sell their wares, books, CD’s, conference fees etc. These that call themselves 'teachers".

2 Peter 2:3 In their greed these teachers will exploit you with fabricated stories. Their condemnation has long been hanging over them, and their destruction has not been sleeping.

Ok, so can I test everything, as the text says to do, do I weigh prophecies like the text says to do, or just sit back, and think to myself, well, there are miracles in the Bible, so these folks have to be telling the truth?

Thanks, frog.

 

[FoundInGrace]

Absolutely you can question, the bereans checked everything, through questioning reasoning things out with God as God asked us to we become more solid in Him because we reason out bit by bit what we know what and who we believe for certain when we do queston and test things. Imho in charismatic circles people dont question enough for some reason, things that in other denominations would be cut off at the knees because they are obviously wrong Charismatics tolerate.. its weird.
So feel free to question frogster, its how we learn and grow.

 

[gideons300]

This non-inflammatory post, it is broad, and general, not directed at anyone on our forum, but to the events in the movement, and the debate in the movement.


Often when I, or others challenge or doubt, a prophecy, a person, or miraculous tales, we are met with with, sorry, but what I now view as redundant reply.

The person not liking what I say, will reply by saying…”there are miracles in the Bible!”

To that I say, sure, but we know they are true, because they are in the Bible. But why does that mean I or others can’t doubt, or question, some of these, elaborate stories, just because there are miracles in the bible?


There are quite a few texts to prove that people, in the church, “from your own number”, men (and I guess women) will arise, and be wolves, and the motive is shown, to draw disciples for themselves. What better way to do that, gather disciples, than present yourself, as this super powerful person, with all kinds of great secrets to the higher spiritual life?


Acts 20:29 I know that after my departure fierce wolves will come in among you, not sparing the flock; 30 and from among your own selves will arise men speaking twisted things, to draw away the disciples after them.

Serving their own appetites, preying on the naïve, who believe everything, usually young converts, are often awed by flattery, as some sell prophecies, or certainly free style wield them around, a little to quickly, in my opinion..

Rom 16:18 For such persons do not serve our Lord Christ, but their own appetites, and by smooth talk and flattery they deceive the hearts of the naive.

Said by Peter also, making up stories, and greed is the motive, as they collect funds, and sell their wares, books, CD’s, conference fees etc. These that call themselves 'teachers".

2 Peter 2:3 In their greed these teachers will exploit you with fabricated stories. Their condemnation has long been hanging over them, and their destruction has not been sleeping.

Ok, so can I test everything, as the text says to do, do I weigh prophecies like the text says to do, or just sit back, and think to myself, well, there are miracles in the Bible, so these folks have to be telling the truth?

Thanks, frog.

Froggy, miracles DO happen! The proof is that you and I are in agreement....again.... and what is that...two times in less than two weeks?? Praise God!

What I want to see is men of God who will do those miracles while weeping for lost souls, while living modestly so that others might eat and that they want more to be examples unto the flock rather than fleecers of them. Lord, give us men who first have defeated the pride that wants the recognition of THEIR ministry and instead bow their heads when they are used and say "I am but an unprofitable servant." I know they are out there, but in our western all-about-what-God-can-do-for-me Christianity, they are far overshadowed by men who love the spotlight, and the benefits thereof. Even if one is not a "prosperity" preacher or teacher, if the result is the same, it really does not matter, does it?

Many walk now who think they have the world (and the church) on a string, but they had best pray that the string does not get so strong that it can become a noose. It is an sobering responsibility to take oversight of the sheep and if they are not led into pastures that cause them to flourish spiritually as opposed to success in the material realm, or in an improved outward appearance of the old nature only, their fate will not be a pretty one.

Blessings to you, brother.

Gids

 

[Frogster]

Absolutely you can question, the bereans checked everything, through questioning reasoning things out with God as God asked us to we become more solid in Him because we reason out bit by bit what we know what and who we believe for certain when we do queston and test things. Imho in charismatic circles people dont question enough for some reason, things that in other denominations would be cut off at the knees because they are obviously wrong Charismatics tolerate.. its weird.
So feel free to question frogster, its how we learn and grow.

great post, agreed, and amen, other denominations would see through some things, just by using common sense, actually, i think a certain wing, of our Charismatic movement, gives ammunition to the cessationist people, by giving them the extreme, to hold up as our normal belief, when there is actually a divide in Charismatic cricles, as your post shows, and our bro gideon300 prove, thanks again, frog.

 

[Frogster]

Froggy, miracles DO happen! The proof is that you and I are in agreement....again.... and what is that...two times in less than two weeks?? Praise God!

What I want to see is men of God who will do those miracles while weeping for lost souls, while living modestly so that others might eat and that they want more to be examples unto the flock rather than fleecers of them. Lord, give us men who first have defeated the pride that wants the recognition of THEIR ministry and instead bow their heads when they are used and say "I am but an unprofitable servant." I know they are out there, but in our western all-about-what-God-can-do-for-me Christianity, they are far overshadowed by men who love the spotlight, and the benefits thereof. Even if one is not a "prosperity" preacher or teacher, if the result is the same, it really does not matter, does it?

Many walk now who think they have the world (and the church) on a string, but they had best pray that the string does not get so strong that it can become a noose. It is an sobering responsibility to take oversight of the sheep and if they are not led into pastures that cause them to flourish spiritually as opposed to success in the material realm, or in an improved outward appearance of the old nature only, their fate will not be a pretty one.

Blessings to you, brother.

Gids

amen 2 times in one week!, it must be the Christmas season! luv ya bro, you know I do, even thoygh we spar, and you said good stuff here, vert insightful, thanks! frog.

 

[Yitzchak]

Often when I, or others challenge or doubt, a prophecy, a person, or miraculous stories, we are met with with, sorry, but what I now view as redundant reply.

The person not liking what I say, will reply by saying…”there are miracles in the Bible!”

To that I say, sure, but we know they are true, because they are in the Bible. But why does that mean I or others can’t doubt, or question, some of these, elaborate stories, just because there are miracles in the bible?

The issue and question which arises is upon what basis are they questioned and tested ? That is where it goes from the general to the specific.

There are quite a few texts to prove that people, in the church, “from your own number”, men (and I guess women) will arise, and be wolves, and the motive is shown, to draw disciples for themselves. What better way to do that, gather disciples, than present yourself, as this super powerful person, with all kinds of great secrets to the higher spiritual life?


Acts 20:29 I know that after my departure fierce wolves will come in among you, not sparing the flock; 30 and from among your own selves will arise men speaking twisted things, to draw away the disciples after them.

Serving their own appetites, preying on the naïve, who believe everything, usually young converts, are often awed by flattery, as some sell prophecies, or certainly free style wield them around, a little to quickly, in my opinion..

Rom 16:18 For such persons do not serve our Lord Christ, but their own appetites, and by smooth talk and flattery they deceive the hearts of the naive.

Said by Peter also, making up stories, and greed is the motive, as they collect funds, and sell their wares, books, CD’s, conference fees etc. These that call themselves 'teachers".

2 Peter 2:3 In their greed these teachers will exploit you with fabricated stories. Their condemnation has long been hanging over them, and their destruction has not been sleeping.

Ok, so can I test everything, as the text says to do, do I weigh prophecies like the text says to do, or just sit back, and think to myself, well, there are miracles in the Bible, so these folks have to be telling the truth?

Thanks, frog.

As this post points out , there are two opposing general principles. On the one side , there is the false and on the other hand there is the true. The Bible teaches about both. The real question is not whether the true and false exist. That is a given. The real question is on what basis can people discern between the good and the bad ? How can the true and the false be discerned ?

This scripture that is well known which says to test all things , or prove all things in the KJV. It says discern between what is good and what is evil. It teaches to hold on to the good and get rid of the evil. But again , it is a general principle.

1Th 5:19 Quench not the Spirit.
1Th 5:20 Despise not prophesyings.
1Th 5:21 Prove all things; hold fast that which is good.
1Th 5:22 Abstain from all appearance of evil.

.

 

[jiminpa]

There would be no issue with a statement to guard and examine our own hearts (which you speak against at every opportunity Froggy, so I guess it would be an issue), lest we move into the area of false prophecy and charlatanism. The issue is that the same people come on to a Charismatic forum and disparage every move of God and discourage everyone attempting to grow in faith, and apparently these people have the time to flood the board with their unbelief.

Yet when the true wolves like johnnymac are discussed it is those of us relying on the Bible who are somehow wrong. It's not those who are encouraging ourselves and others to trust God more who are the wolves it's the ones on here and in the spotlight who dispute the scriptures and discourage growth who are the wolves.

 

[Source Scripture]

There would be no issue with a statement to guard and examine our own hearts (which you speak against at every opportunity Froggy, so I guess it would be an issue), lest we move into the area of false prophecy and charlatanism. The issue is that the same people come on to a Charismatic forum and disparage every move of God and discourage everyone attempting to grow in faith, and apparently these people have the time to flood the board with their unbelief.

Yet when the true wolves like johnnymac are discussed it is those of us relying on the Bible who are somehow wrong. It's not those who are encouraging ourselves and others to trust God more who are the wolves it's the ones on here and in the spotlight who dispute the scriptures and discourage growth who are the wolves.

I do notice a personal response here to frogster, but I don't see a response to the point raised by him. You certainly must agree that among us Charismatics there is a schism, and that one should indeed react to claims that are on the extreme end? I hope you weigh everything, as he suggests. To me, by way of an analogy, it would be like giving out my credit card number, to a stranger on the phone. I would not do it, even though the stranger on the other end, swore he was not corrupt. Would you not question the absurd?

Thank you, Source Scripture.

 

[Yitzchak]

The extremes are the easy ones to discern.

Jim Jones and drinking the kool aid is an obvious false prophet. David Koresh stockpiling weapons. Joseph Smith having an angel sighting where he was given the book of Morman.

But then there are the ones which are more difficult to discern. Billy Graham preaches the basic Gospel , but does not preach the Charismatic gifts and he also waffles on certain doctrinal issues. Graham also makes 406,000 a year contrary to the rumors of a frugal lifestyle. I don't call anything over 50,000 a year frugal.

Franklin Graham was in the news because there was an uproar about him pulling two salaries. Each salary was around 500,000 a year. One for Samaritan's purse , a ministry to the poor and the other from the Billy Graham Evangelistic association. Under pressure from the public , Franklin Graham went down to just the one salary and dropped the Billy Graham Evangelistic association salary. He still was left with around 500,000 a year.

Men like Chuck Swindoll who stick to a very basic message and is very conservative also makes 148,000 a year , not to mention his wife has a job on staff making 82,000 a year. That is 230,000 a year off of the ministry. His daughter is also on staff making 55,000. David Jeremiah makes 104,000 a year which stands out as low by comparison to other preachers , but by comparison to the average American , he make a lot of money. Bill Johnson is reported to make 372,000 a year.

Dave Ramsey who teaches Christian financial seminars has a net worth of over 40 million. All of this is made from the ministry.

The reason that Benny Hinn stands out even amongst all these other preachers who make a lot of money is because he takes it to a whole new level. His salary is reported at 1.3 million a year. The Ministry also provides a ten million dollar house , and a twelve million dollar private jet that takes a million dollars a year to maintain.

I would say that listing the amount of money that famous preachers make speaks for itself. People can debate it , but it is a fact that the average American salary is around 50,000 a year. 51,017 a year in 2012 , to be exact. a preacher might be able to make an argument of being average and push it to maybe 75,000 or so. But once they are 100,000 a year and above , they are not average and they are certainly not frugal. Statistically , frugal would be more like 40,000 a year.

I choose to focus on just the money part in this post. Which is by no means the only criteria.


Here is an article about mega church preachers and the money that they make.

New Report Examines Salaries of Megachurch Pastors

While a previous salary report in 2010 provided specific salary figures (the average salary for a lead pastor in a megachurch in the 2010 report was $147,000), researchers chose not to disclose the exact figures in the latest report that was made public. A second version of the report containing specific salary figures were given to survey participants.

The 2012 report looked at salary trends for 209 megachurches (the highest number of participants since Leadership Network began the survey) – all of which had a weekend worship attendance of at least 2,000. These surveyed churches are considered "game changer" churches or "pacesetting innovative churches."
Church size was found to be the most influential factor in setting staff salaries. The larger the church, the higher the salary for its leaders. "For each additional 1,000 people in attendance, annual salary increases by roughly $8,000 on average for large church senior pastors," the report stated.

It is very difficult to find someone who does not make a lot of money and who also has perfect doctrine and morals. If a person disqualifies everyone who has any fault with them , at all , then how many true preachers are left ?


If I am going by just money , it seems easier to trust David Jeremiah than Benny Hinn. But that is my personal viewpoint. Others may disagree.

I see the extreme amounts of money being made as an area that needs corrected. but I do not take that in and of itself as the final deciding factor on whether someone is fake.

 

[Source Scripture]

The issue and question which arises is upon what basis are they questioned and tested ? That is where it goes from the general to the specific.





As this post points out , there are two opposing general principles. On the one side , there is the false and on the other hand there is the true. The Bible teaches about both. The real question is not whether the true and false exist. That is a given. The real question is on what basis can people discern between the good and the bad ? How can the true and the false be discerned ?

This scripture that is well known which says to test all things , or prove all things in the KJV. It says discern between what is good and what is evil. It teaches to hold on to the good and get rid of the evil. But again , it is a general principle.







.

Greetings, just out of curiousity, what are your boundaries when you hear something? I only ask to see where your bar is at, thank you, SS.

 

[jiminpa]

I do notice a personal response here to frogster, but I don't see a response to the point raised by him. You certainly must agree that among us Charismatics there is a schism, and that one should indeed react to claims that are on the extreme end? I hope you weigh everything, as he suggests. To me, by way of an analogy, it would be like giving out my credit card number, to a stranger on the phone. I would not do it, even though the stranger on the other end, swore he was not corrupt. Would you not question the absurd?

Thank you, Source Scripture.

Tongues were absurd the first time.

 

[Yitzchak]

I do notice a personal response here to frogster, but I don't see a response to the point raised by him. You certainly must agree that among us Charismatics there is a schism, and that one should indeed react to claims that are on the extreme end? I hope you weigh everything, as he suggests. To me, by way of an analogy, it would be like giving out my credit card number, to a stranger on the phone. I would not do it, even though the stranger on the other end, swore he was not corrupt. Would you not question the absurd?

Thank you, Source Scripture.

This is a good point. I think as our personal investment rises , we expect more reassurances.

Despite this fact though , the general mostly do as conditioned to do. We trust our local grocery store or the Domino's pizza and really do not have 100% assurance. It is all a calculated risk.

But as you say , there are extreme situations and people are cautioned to be more careful in those situations.

As an example. The area where I used to live had some criminals who went in as a pair into local business and one would distract the clerk while the other one swapped out the debit machine that was on the front counter. In some businesses like the local Domino's pizza , it was as simple as unplugging the cord which was like a phone cord in the back of the machine. Anyway , they came back a week later and switched the machines again and had a record of all of the pin numbers for the week.
The police and the business worked together to close this loophole since then. But the point is unsuspecting customers who trusted still got burned.


My point is that we cannot protect ourselves from everything. I like the legal term due diligence , in this regard. I used to work for a credit card company and when there were law suits , what the legal department wanted to know was had we done our " due diligence " ? Your point stands. We should show due diligence with certain situations that seem suspect.

 

[Messy]

I see the extreme amounts of money being made as an area that needs corrected. but I do not take that in and of itself as the final deciding factor on whether someone is fake.

 

[Messy]

Tongues were absurd the first time.

But the fruit was good.

 

[Source Scripture]

The extremes are the easy ones to discern.

Jim Jones and drinking the kool aid is an obvious false prophet. David Koresh stockpiling weapons. Joseph Smith having an angel sighting where he was given the book of Morman.

But then there are the ones which are more difficult to discern. Billy Graham preaches the basic Gospel , but does not preach the Charismatic gifts and he also waffles on certain doctrinal issues. Graham also makes 406,000 a year contrary to the rumors of a frugal lifestyle. I don't call anything over 50,000 a year frugal.

Franklin Graham was in the news because there was an uproar about him pulling two salaries. Each salary was around 500,000 a year. One for Samaritan's purse , a ministry to the poor and the other from the Billy Graham Evangelistic association. Under pressure from the public , Franklin Graham went down to just the one salary and dropped the Billy Graham Evangelistic association salary. He still was left with around 500,000 a year.

Men like Chuck Swindoll who stick to a very basic message and is very conservative also makes 148,000 a year , not to mention his wife has a job on staff making 82,000 a year. That is 230,000 a year off of the ministry. His daughter is also on staff making 55,000. David Jeremiah makes 104,000 a year which stands out as low by comparison to other preachers , but by comparison to the average American , he make a lot of money. Bill Johnson is reported to make 372,000 a year.

Dave Ramsey who teaches Christian financial seminars has a net worth of over 40 million. All of this is made from the ministry.

The reason that Benny Hinn stands out even amongst all these other preachers who make a lot of money is because he takes it to a whole new level. His salary is reported at 1.3 million a year. The Ministry also provides a ten million dollar house , and a twelve million dollar private jet that takes a million dollars a year to maintain.

I would say that listing the amount of money that famous preachers make speaks for itself. People can debate it , but it is a fact that the average American salary is around 50,000 a year. 51,017 a year in 2012 , to be exact. a preacher might be able to make an argument of being average and push it to maybe 75,000 or so. But once they are 100,000 a year and above , they are not average and they are certainly not frugal. Statistically , frugal would be more like 40,000 a year.

I choose to focus on just the money part in this post. Which is by no means the only criteria.


Here is an article about mega church preachers and the money that they make.

New Report Examines Salaries of Megachurch Pastors








It is very difficult to find someone who does not make a lot of money and who also has perfect doctrine and morals. If a person disqualifies everyone who has any fault with them , at all , then how many true preachers are left ?


If I am going by just money , it seems easier to trust David Jeremiah than Benny Hinn. But that is my personal viewpoint. Others may disagree.

I see the extreme amounts of money being made as an area that needs corrected. but I do not take that in and of itself as the final deciding factor on whether someone is fake.

Doesn't this post represent the point froster makes, in the same way, he shows generalities, and those who seek to subvert things by the generic general reflex response of "It's in the Bible"? Doesn't this post do just what he spoke of? It raises diverse information, but it seems to try to diminish by manner of confusion, and a vast array of thought in Christendom, as it shows diversity, but as if one can't make a decision, the menu is too large. But does it prove his point wrong that he should challenge things? So again, are we to think that financial diveristy means we can't make a decision? So I would advance the thought that this post proves his point, personally I can decide even amidst the diversity, I have a clear mind, and I am happy to us it, and among our Charismatic diversity, I can make a decision, diversity, or vastness, should not stop out hearts, thank you, SS.

 

[Source Scripture]

Tongues were absurd the first time.

Excuse me, but the scripture shows that the objectors to the tongues were wrong, however frogster uses scripture to show that some teachers are wrong, that is quite a difference. Not only that but in Acts chapter two, there was no absurdity with those who spoke in tongues, they just did so. SS.

 

[Source Scripture]

But the fruit was good.

Good point, SS.

 

[Yitzchak]

Greetings, just out of curiousity, what are your boundaries when you hear something? I only ask to see where your bar is at, thank you, SS.

I think it depends upon the situation. But as a general rule , I think we should show due diligence.

The definition of due diligence.

Due diligence - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary

1
: the care that a reasonable person exercises to avoid harm to other persons or their property

2
: research and analysis of a company or organization done in preparation for a business transaction (as a corporate merger or purchase of securities)

For example , in my work at the credit card company , we had training classes on what the legal department had determined were our responsibility to protect people's private information.


Now on the other side of the issue was the expectation to show a reasonable benefit of the doubt to people. It was about the balance between protecting versus the need to be able to conduct business which requires a certain amount of calculated risk.

For example , when people called in to conduct business about their credit card account , they were asked certain security questions to identify them. Some customers opted for an optional password and others went with the standard questions. The calls were recorded and a person could review whether due diligence had been done if someone's account was compromised.

Having worked in that industry , I am amazed that more things do not go wrong because the security is very minimum. But in the aggregate , it works. The goal is not to prevent fraud 100% . The goal is to show due diligence in a legal sense. To show a reasonable attempt was made to protect people's information and accounts.

This is balanced on the other end by a need to do business and with that comes calculated risk. which means that one must show a reasonable benefit of the doubt to people in aworld where there ir raely 100% certainty.


I am saying all of this to show general principles which can be applied just as easily to the spiritual. We find the balance between due diligence on the once end and a need for a measured trust extended in order to operate in an imperfect world on the other end.


So to answer your question , I think it depends upon what my responsibility is in the situation. If I am the overseer over a ministry , then my due diligence is much greater than if I am one of millions of viewers or listeners tuning in to a half hour program. In the case of me being an overseer , saying I simply do not know would be irresponsible. But in the case of a casual viewer , I am comfortable saying I simply do not know and giving a larger benefit of the doubt.

I don't buy into the argument that every individual believer has to know about every ministry and take upon ourselves the responsibility to warn or advise everyone about every ministry.


What I am saying is our due diligence changes depending upon our role and our personal risk and investment into the situation or ministry. I lean towards the benefit of the doubt except where there is some good reason to take upon myself some burden of due diligence.

One of the key questions to be answered about this subject is what is our personal responsibility ? Things will go wrong in life and people will get burned, What is a reasonable amount of trust for us to extend ?


As for specifics. I Insist upon the fundamentals of Christian doctrine. The type of thing found in the creeds and confessions.

I prefer that money and morals be good , but in today's world of 50% divorce rate , I find that I have to compromise my personal ideals and lower my standards for almost every church or ministry. I only use the divorce rate as one example. Another example is the rate of bankruptcies , Christians running their finances on fleshly spending that places them deep in debt and churches doing likewise. Porn usage is another. If I don't allow some compromise , I exclude just about everyone. So I grade on a curve and leave a lot for God to judge and deal with. The sad truth is that many of the leaders who are failing in areas are a good representation of the moral failing of the overall Christian community. There is a shortage of good pastors and leaders and the pressures of the ministry can be tough.

So I apply a standard of getting rid of the far extremes such as Mormans and Jehovah witnesses. The ones who are false in that sense. With leaders who seem to me to be Christian but flawed , such as Joyce Meyer and John Bevere and Bill Johnson , I take the tactic of eating the meat and spitting out the bones.

My list of leaders who I really trust is very short. My list of leaders which I partially trust and give the benefit of the doubt to is very long. The majority fall into that category. The list of those that I call false prophets is very short. I do place Rick Warren ( for ecumenical interfaith ties with Islam ) and Rob Bell ( for universalism ) into that category , but emphasize that is my personal opinion , not an authoritative proclamation to the Christian community. I have specific reasons and am willing to discuss those. I freely admit that there is an element of subjective personal witness of what i believe is the Holy Spirit bearing witness with my spirit. But I have more objective reasons also.

 

[paul becke]

The only verbal prophetic utterances I've received were from total strangers. One was and old man in a Catholic bookshop in a part of London I'd never been to before and many miles from where I lived, who called out to me: 'Why aren't you going to Mass?'
I'd stopped going on my own initiative. Not that 'initiative' seems quite the right word!

The other utterance was of an even more personal nature which I'd rather not go into, here, although it was not negative. It was on a ship from Singapore to Hong Kong, if I remember correctly, where I was to catch a plane to Wellington, New Zealand. It was from a Chinese-Australian missionary lady with a more typically Australian lady missionary companion, who just came up to me on the deck and told me it.

On the face of it, they are the only kind of prophetic utterances I'd be inclined to take seriously. By a complete stranger, outside of a religious environment and far from home.

 

[Frogster]

Doesn't this post represent the point froster makes, in the same way, he shows generalities, and those who seek to subvert things by the generic general reflex response of "It's in the Bible"? Doesn't this post do just what he spoke of? It raises diverse information, but it seems to try to diminish by manner of confusion, and a vast array of thought in Christendom, as it shows diversity, but as if one can't make a decision, the menu is too large. But does it prove his point wrong that he should challenge things? So again, are we to think that financial diveristy means we can't make a decision? So I would advance the thought that this post proves his point, personally I can decide even amidst the diversity, I have a clear mind, and I am happy to us it, and among our Charismatic diversity, I can make a decision, diversity, or vastness, should not stop out hearts, thank you, SS.

not bad for a man your age!