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

[Frogster]

This would be interesting to see. I would like to see where that is quoted, and in reference to who's manifestation.

I remember hearing a recording of some worship where angels joined in. (It's on the Net.) Man, I was really enjoying it.

Of course we've been talking about using wisdom in not uttering hasty generalizations that make ALL manifestations counterfeit, and ESPECIALLY not speaking directly against individuals in a defamatory way.

And NOT using scripture to justify doing it.

That's another generalization (not a simple fact). That's like saying Moses' sign was not legit because pharoah's magicians did the same sign.

If the Catholics claimed some kind of angelic apparition, I'd want to hear the message, because even the devils don't want to just raise spiritual awareness, they want to lead people away from the truth.

ask rodney!

would you bet about rodney, on dust, feathers, or gems, not to mention what he calls ,"muffins with the angels", all in a derogatory, against it manner? He is against all this angel friendship familiarity too, I will, what say you?

so, still, no text to counter my text, just for the record, that means you are not making a Biblical counter to what I say, fine, but if it is not biblical it is????

I used text to show there are story tellers, fakes, angel worshippers, etc. Can you counter that with text?

 

[Frogster]

Thank you for the disclosure bc that explains a lot. I haven't heard anything scripturally sound that refutes those things Frogsters lumps all together with some kind of demonic heresy. On one thread it priests levitating and on another its NAR and false apostles. No one can deny that there are false things that happen in churches … ALL CHURCHES. The most false thing is the church where nothing happens.
Your partner tries to get people to admit that such and such is false and then wants to apply that to all our experiences…
Frogster will not say what he himself agrees with, therefore I can't figure out even what the point of most of his posts are?? Is it to just say that if your not sitting quietly and reverently in church then your false. Are all apostle's false… how do we know. Its not my problem bc I'd have to be very convinced to listen to anyone who calls themselves an apostle… yet I have known people who I truly believe walked in an apostleship. But of course they'd never call themselves apostles…. planting churches, spreading the gospel, training pastors, healing the sick, feeding the poor…. no reward other then the Lord is gracious… to me that is an apostle.
I asked Frogster repeatedly to name someone he admires who is a Charismatic leader….. …… silence.
I don't know that some people haven't thrown gold glitter on the floor… I wasn't there, but I do know a church where the glory dust fell all over people and did not disappear until the next day. I do know people who have been miraculously healed and others who had faith to believe and were not. Does that mean all healing is fake… only atheists and anti-charismatcs use that formula…
when we have these churches so fearful of anything they don't approve of … (and you can't keep any two people happy), how do you expect the church to learn to move in the prophetic when the naysayers voice is the loudest in the room….
I know a woman who told me they had the gold oil all over them in worship… no reason to lie… perfectly lovely woman who I know very well…. I wasn't there but I believe her. The fruit of it was that they were touched and He was glorified…. so no problem for me… now if a ministry wants to sell an idea or teach that this is proof of divine… something… then I have a problem. But notice… its me with the problem, not everyone else.
I have a problem with cold dead churches and people who judge others bc they don't approve of their theological bent…. as long as its not another gospel… then I don't have a problem…
God bless, andrea

ummmm..well...do you believe in crying statues, bleeding hosts in people mouths, rosary beads that turn to a gold color or not?

It's hard to understand you position.

No offense, with all due respect, you say alot, fine, but where do you stand?

Is it hard to undestand me? NO......

 

[Frogster]

I know you say you are Charismatic and I've been hearing that a lot but if your willing to limit the Holy Spirit to your own interpretation of the scriptures then how can the Holy Spirit manifest in your midst when you've told Him what you'll allow?? {my thought is that if I tell God He is only allowed to move in my house when its convenient/comfortable for me…. I don't think He'll bother me at all}. I personally, (opinion) think the Lord uses Holy Laughter and being slain in the Spirit just to pull the rug out from under some of these uptight so-called Charismatic people. I myself have never been slain, I've buckled but not slain… yet I know it happens, my daughter at 10 was slain in the Spirit and I've known people who were on the floor frozen for hours…. I've probably seen thousands….. but not for me…lol. There came a move against it about 10 years ago…. rarely see it now… yes lots of people went down bc they thought they should, some just were submitting, others were pushed, but that never negated the reality of the ones that were truly moved by the Holy Spirit. It stopped when people started attributing it to Satan…. just like they do now with the manifestations that occur in various places. Sorry but the Lord will let you dry up before He'll allow you to attribute His work to the devil.
So no I don't recant, I think there should be another name for those people who desire to control the manifestations until they approve… post-charismatic…. or reformed-charismatics…. how about skeptical-charismatics, as opposed to LORD JUST TOUCH ME-Charismatics.
I told the Lord today, I didn't care if He wanted to drop gems in my house… or gold dust… I don't even care if there real or its glitter…. I would just love it and no one has to believe me or approve bc its just Him I desire…. so now I'm waiting expectantly…. but then I spend most of my life seeing God's miracles…maybe He doesn't slay me bc He doesn't have to…. I see Him all over… every Wednesday for years I had a prayer group and very single Wed, afternoon the sun would shine into my kitchen while we were in prayer… even on rainy days… it would always stop just long enough for the sun to warm you a little …. not something to write home about but our lil group was always just glad the Lord would bless our time…..
Recently we had a huge problem with our lake…. DEP (Dept. Environmental Protection) was going to force us to drain it… but the Lord told me to begin blessing the DEP and thanking them for being involved… (woke me up to tell me that). I came downstairs to tell my husband…. bc we were so worried. He said the Lord had told him the same thing… that was a big change since we are both NOT FANS of the state of NJ DEP…. long story short…. one person after another came into our lives and blessed us… the final bill was $7500 including for the engineer…. bills paid. DEP is happy so are we and so are the thousands of koi in our lake. It took a whole crew of men with huge pieces of equipment to remove all the dirt… reset the pipe and bring in all those concrete blocks… before and after. Sorry for the double pic but I'm just learning how to do this… neat. But the point is the Lord works in many ways… and absolutely everyone who comes on my property gets to hear about the miracle of our home anyway and how the Lord did a miracle even when we got it…. we paid 160 thousand for a piece of property worth the tax assessor said was worth a million…. but the Lord had told me and I believed Him. So its not gems…. or is it…LOL
God bless,
View attachment 132003View attachment 132002

do you tell the Lord crying statues are ok as you do glitter dust?




see, bottom line, the frog proved his point, one can't reject anything in another religions mysticism, or "miracles" because for one to protect ones own beliefs in the extremes of their own system, and maintain protectionism, one has to believe in the other religions extremes, or at least not challenge them...that is a fact. One has to believe all, or agree with all, or one can be called various names, I don't mean you are, but certainly you must see the point?


You can't say their strange mystic stuff is wrong, while saying yours are right...


How can you tell a Catholic that they are wrong about all their stuff, or another religions things? You can't, why? Because they have you beat, because they can challenge you just as fast, for believing in dust, feathers, or any other extreme silly in our Christian charismatic movement. It is all or nothing, those who don't want their stuff challenged, can't challenge others, whereby their silence is also a form of approval. It has to be, one is bound by their own protectionist, politically correct doctrine of silence, all of which , is clearly proven wrong in the glorious scriprures, that God proclaimed. So the second one challenges another, one imediately has to be a jezebel, or devisive, because he or she is now doing the same action, that he or she has judged to be jezebel..lol..

So really, you can't ever challenge anything, because you you bring a self induced bad proclamtion on youself, by way of a reflex judgment, that is a fact. Good for the goose, good for the gander.

so really, with all due respect, please, be like the frog, and just say no to things, really, it is no big deal, the bible has alot of it, saying no,..THE SCRIPTURES DO SO.....

luv ya, no offense, with all due respect, just trying to show you something, have a blessed new year, frog.

 

[Alive_Again]

This reminds me a little of "bizarro" Superman comic books.

...make a clear case against the extremes, and the extremely false teachers. His important points, have not been addressed properly, nor has his Biblical analysis been proved wrong

Certain manifestations have been identified, but no people or even fellowships have been identified. It's just been a list of unusual manifestations, followed by condemning them as deception.

There hasn't been ANY biblical analysis. It's just a bunch of scripture quoting without any specific instances. All general.

...these silly jeers that are about a fellow member dragging out the tired old pharisee and fool words, indictaing a loss of argument by his opponents, and possibly frustration.When someone is losing an argument, sadly name calling is the first indicator.

The odd thing is that this is what we're trying to bring to a halt (name calling). All the jeers and false accusation against people without any quotations, specific instances, or any accompanying doctrine (that's what we're really supposed to be examining.

Signs point to something. Look at what they are pointing to. We'd like to anyway, but when we try to narrow down anything specific, there are accusations of not touching the anointing. As though that relieves anyone of the responsibility of backing up an accusation with specific facts.

If there is any frustration, is that it is just a general finger pointing. If this were to be taken to a court of law, a burden of proof would have to be presented, which of course is absolutely lacking.

It sows discord among brethren, and they ARE our brethren.

It's not about demonizing "the frog". It's about holding yourself to a standard of behavior where you have to back up accusations with proof. finger pointing isn't enough.

...as they think it is wrong, so their own words condemn them!

It is quite shocking to say the least. We're tryinig to keep you from condemning yourself by not making rash judgments against the family of God. Where is the condemnation in that?

I want to add this as well.

I used text to show there are story tellers, fakes, angel worshippers, etc. Can you counter that with text?

There are a lot more scriptures than what you quoted about deception. Just quoting them as a precedent for the possibility of deception doesn't impose reality.

It's fair for you to say that you don't believe in them, but it's wrong to say outright that they are all of the devil, because you're not familiar with all of them. Yes, pharaoh's magicians turned a rod instead a snake. But Moses did the same thing, and his sign was from God.

It will never be about just quoting scripture when an accusation is made about someone.

The devil quoted scripture when he tempted Jesus.

Also, to say that a special sign of some kind is amiss just because it is a special sign is just like saying that everyone who sees visions and talks about them is puffed up (and you insist on this all of the time).

 

[Frogster]

This reminds me a little of "bizarro" Superman comic books.

Certain manifestations have been identified, but no people or even fellowships have been identified. It's just been a list of unusual manifestations, followed by condemning them as deception.

There hasn't been ANY biblical analysis. It's just a bunch of scripture quoting without any specific instances. All general.


The odd thing is that this is what we're trying to bring to a halt (name calling). All the jeers and false accusation against people without any quotations, specific instances, or any accompanying doctrine (that's what we're really supposed to be examining.

Signs point to something. Look at what they are pointing to. We'd like to anyway, but when we try to narrow down anything specific, there are accusations of not touching the anointing. As though that relieves anyone of the responsibility of backing up an accusation with specific facts.

If there is any frustration, is that it is just a general finger pointing. If this were to be taken to a court of law, a burden of proof would have to be presented, which of course is absolutely lacking.

It sows discord among brethren, and they ARE our brethren.

It's not about demonizing "the frog". It's about holding yourself to a standard of behavior where you have to back up accusations with proof. finger pointing isn't enough.


It is quite shocking to say the least. We're tryinig to keep you from condemning yourself by not making rash judgments against the family of God. Where is the condemnation in that?

I raise another good point. Do you see how you are hemmed in, because according t your own theology, you have to just go with everything said by any religion, because once you call me a name or say i can't challenge anyone, that boxes you in, because you can't challenge anything, or those you challenge can level the same charges, you level against me, for doing as i do. All while i do what scripture does. So who has freedom, me or you?


You are trapped, by your own theology, you can't challenge, or judgment has to come to you, as you deem it comes to me, it has to work both ways. See?

You are forced to have to introject everything, but not me, I am free to speak,

 

[Frogster]

This reminds me a little of "bizarro" Superman comic books.

Certain manifestations have been identified, but no people or even fellowships have been identified. It's just been a list of unusual manifestations, followed by condemning them as deception.

There hasn't been ANY biblical analysis. It's just a bunch of scripture quoting without any specific instances. All general.


The odd thing is that this is what we're trying to bring to a halt (name calling). All the jeers and false accusation against people without any quotations, specific instances, or any accompanying doctrine (that's what we're really supposed to be examining.

Signs point to something. Look at what they are pointing to. We'd like to anyway, but when we try to narrow down anything specific, there are accusations of not touching the anointing. As though that relieves anyone of the responsibility of backing up an accusation with specific facts.

If there is any frustration, is that it is just a general finger pointing. If this were to be taken to a court of law, a burden of proof would have to be presented, which of course is absolutely lacking.

It sows discord among brethren, and they ARE our brethren.

It's not about demonizing "the frog". It's about holding yourself to a standard of behavior where you have to back up accusations with proof. finger pointing isn't enough.


It is quite shocking to say the least. We're tryinig to keep you from condemning yourself by not making rash judgments against the family of God. Where is the condemnation in that?

I want to add this as well.

There are a lot more scriptures than what you quoted about deception. Just quoting them as a precedent for the possibility of deception doesn't impose reality.

It's fair for you to say that you don't believe in them, but it's wrong to say outright that they are all of the devil, because you're not familiar with all of them. Yes, pharaoh's magicians turned a rod instead a snake. But Moses did the same thing, and his sign was from God.

It will never be about just quoting scripture when an accusation is made about someone.

The devil quoted scripture when he tempted Jesus.

Also, to say that a special sign of some kind is amiss just because it is a special sign is just like saying that everyone who sees visions and talks about them is puffed up (and you insist on this all of the time).

ok, point proved here, I am God's anointed, touch me not, do not challenge me anymore. Thanks.

 

[TillICollapse]

see, bottom line, the frog proved his point, one can't reject anything in another religions mysticism, or "miracles" because for one to protect ones own beliefs in the extremes of their own system, and maintain protectionism, one has to believe in the other religions extremes, or at least not challenge them...that is a fact. One has to believe all, or agree with all, or one can be called various names, I don't mean you are, but certainly you must see the point?

You can't say their strange mystic stuff is wrong, while saying yours are right...

I fail to see how this is a "fact". Plenty of people believe certain things, while denying others. You yourself appear to be an example. Unless you are saying it's a "fact" for a particular type of person and not all people.

Also, where in the scriptures does it say that to protect ones own beliefs in the extremes of their own system, one has to believe in the other religions extremes or at least not challenge them ? Is that something you got from the text, or your own take on things ?

How can you tell a Catholic that they are wrong about all their stuff, or another religions things? You can't, why? Because they have you beat, because they can challenge you just as fast, for believing in dust, feathers, or any other extreme silly in our Christian charismatic movement. It is all or nothing, those who don't want their stuff challenged, can't challenge others, whereby their silence is also a form of approval. It has to be, one is bound by their own protectionist, politically correct doctrine of silence, all of which , is clearly proven wrong in the glorious scriprures, that God proclaimed. So the second one challenges another, one imediately has to be a jezebel, or devisive, because he or she is now doing the same action, that he or she has judged to be jezebel..lol..

So really, you can't ever challenge anything, because you you bring a self induced bad proclamtion on youself, by way of a reflex judgment, that is a fact. Good for the goose, good for the gander.

You *can* challenge things without bringing bad proclamation on yourself. Is this some kind of "law" you are speaking ?

 

[Alive_Again]

Do you see how you are hemmed in, because according t your own theology, you have to just go with everything said by any religion,

NO one is saying this. Apparently this is what you hear when someone says to use fairness in judging these things. It's like some kind of funky counter reality what's right is turned around into some out of context scripture quoting and there's no way it's of God.

because once you call me a name or say i can't challenge anyone, that boxes you in, because you can't challenge anything,

I'm not calling you any names. You can state your opinion about certain signs, but you lump them all together and that is a generalization. Not only that, but now you've thrown in the Catholic "signs" with it as though to make it preposterous.

...All while i do what scripture does. So who has freedom, me or you?

You take "freedom" and liberty and frequently take potshots at things you don't understand. You call this freedom, but it comes at a price. I object because I don't want to see anyone else in the group get dragged down by making the same rash judgments (against real people).

In this case, it's really just a grouping of "signs" you don't believe in. I'm not sanctioning them either (as I know nothing of them). But I'm not foolish enough to just whip out the brand of "false apostles" on anyone I please.

You are trapped, by your own theology, you can't challenge, or judgment has to come to you, as you deem it comes to me, it has to work both ways. See?

I'm not stepping into your tangled web. Sad to say this. You turn things around and imply that I'm "trapped" for trying to implore a little sense.

Take another look at the post tha had the judge graphic on it. (If you even read it. You often say you don't really read what I say.) That's as middle of the road as you'll find and if you can take a message like that and twist it into what you're saying here, I'm not even going to gratify that with an answer.

You can think what you want and judge exactly how you wish to be judged. Just don't drag others into that trap and act like you're doing some kind of service to the Body.

People who do these things absolutely terrify me because they're demonstrating living in a realm where the rules aren't supposed to apply (I'm not talking about the forum either.)

 

[Frogster]

I fail to see how this is a "fact". Plenty of people believe certain things, while denying others. You yourself appear to be an example. Unless you are saying it's a "fact" for a particular type of person and not all people.

Also, where in the scriptures does it say that to protect ones own beliefs in the extremes of their own system, one has to believe in the other religions extremes or at least not challenge them ? Is that something you got from the text, or your own take on things ?

You *can* challenge things without bringing bad proclamation on yourself. Is this some kind of "law" you are speaking ?

really?go tell a catholic you think ctying stautes are silly, and watch how fast he can say cheap glitter dust is silly. Wouldn't he have a point?


good for the goose, good for e gander, silly is what silly does in both religions.

 

[Frogster]

NO one is saying this. Apparently this is what you hear when someone says to use fairness in judging these things. It's like some kind of funky counter reality what's right is turned around into some out of context scripture quoting and there's no way it's of God.


I'm not calling you any names. You can state your opinion about certain signs, but you lump them all together and that is a generalization. Not only that, but now you've thrown in the Catholic "signs" with it as though to make it preposterous.

You take "freedom" and liberty and frequently take potshots at things you don't understand. You call this freedom, but it comes at a price. I object because I don't want to see anyone else in the group get dragged down by making the same rash judgments (against real people).

In this case, it's really just a grouping of "signs" you don't believe in. I'm not sanctioning them either (as I know nothing of them). But I'm not foolish enough to just whip out the brand of "false apostles" on anyone I please.

I'm not stepping into your tangled web. Sad to say this. You turn things around and imply that I'm "trapped" for trying to implore a little sense.

Take another look at the post tha had the judge graphic on it. (If you even read it. You often say you don't really read what I say.) That's as middle of the road as you'll find and if you can take a message like that and twist it into what you're saying here, I'm not even going to gratify that with an answer.

You can think what you want and judge exactly how you wish to be judged. Just don't drag others into that trap and act like you're doing some kind of service to the Body.

People who do these things absolutely terrify me because they're demonstrating living in a realm where the rules aren't supposed to apply (I'm not talking about the forum either.)

sorry,,but it's true, if you call one jezebel, you must be ready to receive the same proclamation if you challenge others.


oh, by the way, please don't challenge me any more, if others have the right to call themselves "God's anointed", and say touch me not, so do i so please respect your own theology, agree with me, and touch me not, thanks, God's anointed one, frog.

 

[TillICollapse]

really?go tell a catholic you think ctying stautes are silly, and watch how fast he can say cheap glitter dust is silly. Wouldn't he have a point?


good for the goose, good for e gander, silly is what silly does in both religions.

But that's just it ... IF I told a Catholic such a thing AND they said something similar back to me, they haven't made any point. All that's been stated are two OPINIONS lol. Opinions are not facts.

Tastes great, less filling. Chicago deep dish is the "real" pizza. No Napoli has the real pizza. Pizza Hut is the best, no Grimaldi's is the best (Grimaldis ... gotta try it if there is one within driving distance !!!)

It's similar as to when two opposing people both claim scriptures as their authority for their opposing views.

Now, if I told another believer that I thought something they experienced was "silly", all I've done is stated my POV. Whether it's right or wrong. I haven't backed it up with any facts, nor demonstrated why it's so. I've phrased it in an "opinion" format. It doesn't prove anything, IOW.

Now, flat out claiming something is of God ... and two people claiming something is of God, you aren't getting into opinions. You are making claims on behalf of God.

"Johnny told me I was going to be the next manager." ... "No, Johnny told ME I was going to be the next manager."

The way you clear that up, if you wish, is to ask Johnny directly what He said, and have Him address BOTH parties who are making the claims. Same goes for God.

Also, I'll repeat ... where in the scriptures does it say that to protect ones own beliefs in the extremes of their own system, one has to believe in the other religions extremes or at least not challenge them ? Is that something you got from the text, or your own take on things ? And also, you *can* challenge things without bringing bad proclamation on yourself. Is this some kind of "law" you are speaking of ?

 

[Frogster]

But that's just it ... IF I told a Catholic such a thing AND they said something similar back to me, they haven't made any point. All that's been stated are two OPINIONS lol. Opinions are not facts.

Tastes great, less filling. Chicago deep dish is the "real" pizza. No Napoli has the real pizza. Pizza Hut is the best, no Grimaldi's is the best (Grimaldis ... gotta try it if there is one within driving distance !!!)

It's similar as to when two opposing people both claim scriptures as their authority for their opposing views.

Now, if I told another believer that I thought something they experienced was "silly", all I've done is stated my POV. Whether it's right or wrong. I haven't backed it up with any facts, nor demonstrated why it's so. I've phrased it in an "opinion" format. It doesn't prove anything, IOW.

Now, flat out claiming something is of God ... and two people claiming something is of God, you aren't getting into opinions. You are making claims on behalf of God.

"Johnny told me I was going to be the next manager." ... "No, Johnny told ME I was going to be the next manager."

The way you clear that up, if you wish, is to ask Johnny directly what He said, and have Him address BOTH parties who are making the claims. Same goes for God.

Also, I'll repeat ... where in the scriptures does it say that to protect ones own beliefs in the extremes of their own system, one has to believe in the other religions extremes or at least not challenge them ? Is that something you got from the text, or your own take on things ? And also, you *can* challenge things without bringing bad proclamation on yourself. Is this some kind of "law" you are speaking of ?

but do you think crying statues are silly?

besides, people don't like me challenging, but if you are admittedly a challenger, fine, at least then you are being true to your theology, but if one calls others names, for challenging, then challenges, what does that make him?

 

[Frogster]

But that's just it ... IF I told a Catholic such a thing AND they said something similar back to me, they haven't made any point. All that's been stated are two OPINIONS lol. Opinions are not facts.

Tastes great, less filling. Chicago deep dish is the "real" pizza. No Napoli has the real pizza. Pizza Hut is the best, no Grimaldi's is the best (Grimaldis ... gotta try it if there is one within driving distance !!!)

It's similar as to when two opposing people both claim scriptures as their authority for their opposing views.

Now, if I told another believer that I thought something they experienced was "silly", all I've done is stated my POV. Whether it's right or wrong. I haven't backed it up with any facts, nor demonstrated why it's so. I've phrased it in an "opinion" format. It doesn't prove anything, IOW.

Now, flat out claiming something is of God ... and two people claiming something is of God, you aren't getting into opinions. You are making claims on behalf of God.

"Johnny told me I was going to be the next manager." ... "No, Johnny told ME I was going to be the next manager."

The way you clear that up, if you wish, is to ask Johnny directly what He said, and have Him address BOTH parties who are making the claims. Same goes for God.

Also, I'll repeat ... where in the scriptures does it say that to protect ones own beliefs in the extremes of their own system, one has to believe in the other religions extremes or at least not challenge them ? Is that something you got from the text, or your own take on things ? And also, you *can* challenge things without bringing bad proclamation on yourself. Is this some kind of "law" you are speaking of ?

in other words, those who don't allow challenges, can't challenge, or say they disbelieve silly things, or they do the 'wrong" that they say i do. See my point?

 

[Frogster]

sooooo...lets bring on the crying statues! If cheap glitter is ok, so are tearful stone figurines.

 

[Ajax 777]

besides, people don't like me challenging, but if you are admittedly a challenger, fine, at least then you are being true to your theology, but if one calls others names, for challenging, then challenges, what does that make him?

I just thought of a new idea for a game: Hungry Hungry Hypocrites.

 

[TillICollapse]

in other words, those who don't allow challenges, can't challenge, or say they disbelieve silly things, or they do the 'wrong" that they say i do. See my point?

"When you point a finger at me in such a way for doing the very thing you/yourself are doing, you are pointing one back at yourself," in other words. Yes ? Is that the point ? Hippocrisy/etc ?

I see that you are TRYING to make a point, but it also seems that you are the one trying to make and enforce it ... so it's not really a fact. It's more like a non-sequiter. It may appear logical, but it's not, because there are examples that show it's logic falls apart. You, yourself, are such an example that breaks the very idea lol. You can claim to believe in many things while dismissing others.

Even if a person who calls another person a name for doing the very thing they are doing, and this can be shown ... it doesn't necessarily negate either's claims. This is what is known as an ad hominem fallacy in an argument, specifically it's probably a tu quoque variety.

but do you think crying statues are silly?

Personally ? For the most part, I wouldn't use the word silly ... I think they are often a serious manifestation from other spirits that can be convincingly deceptive. There are other things I would call "silly" which I would still classify as serious deceptions, however lol.

What I don't find "silly", are the soul's and hearts of the people involved.

I will get back to this here in this next part, however, because I left a door open I want to explain ...

besides, people don't like me challenging, but if you are admittedly a challenger, fine, at least then you are being true to your theology, but if one calls others names, for challenging, then challenges, what does that make him?

But I don't see where you are *challenging* lol. To me, a challenge involves specifically calling someone out, and asking them to prove their stance. Scripture battles are not what I would consider proof either. Nor are ad hominem attempts to discredit.

Now ... lemme give an example of something I found ridiculous, on the level of "glitter and crying statues" (to parallel to your own opinions), and why it gave me a moment of pause on how I handled it. And I did not pause because of "Don't touch the Lord's anointed," and all of that. I'm not a fan of Jedi mind tricks lol.

I know there have been some long posts in your thread, but hopefully you'll bare with me a sec:

Many years ago, I befriended a guy that was going to a church I attended named Alex (name change for privacy). We talked in some of the groups and such, and this guy knew scriptures inside and out, seemed to be "on fire" and all of that, etc. Always level headed, calm, and he had a scriptural answer for everything. We were friends in "church", but hadn't gotten together outside of it.

Well one group meeting, he wanted to exchange numbers, to hang out sometime, and so I did. A few days later or so, he called wanting to meet up with me ... he had something important to tell me and go over with me, and wanted to hang out. We set a time, and I told him he could come over to my apartment, and I told him where I lived, etc

Well, the day he was supposed to come over, I had a pit-in-my-stomach feeling. A FEELING. I recognized it as such. But what I couldn't explain, was the origin of it. And as it got closer to him coming, I started to recognize what I believed was the Spirit leading me, telling me to tell him something specifically: "Take two pills and call me in the morning."

I mean, clear as day ... I was supposed to tell him this when he showed up at my door. And after that, I actually thought I was supposed to send him on his way and literally, have him call me in the morning. It seemed strange, of course ... but it was strong, and very clear.

So he shows up at the door, all smiles, and I said hi, and he started to try and come in ... and I said, "Well wait. This will sound strange to you no doubt, but ... I think God wants me to tell you something ? Maybe the Spirit is showing me something ? Its this: "Take two pills and call me in the morning," and I think you're supposed to go back home and do just that, call me in the morning."

Well his face lit up like a Christmas tree ... all smiles, like he had just seen an angel descending in front of him.

"I know what that means !!! I know what that means ! Praise the Lord, He has answered me ! I know what that means ! I want to tell you !" and I said, "No no ... call me in the morning I think. Lemme know tomorrow lol ..." So he left, on cloud nine.

I was still a bit confused as to what it meant, but I was happy that it at least MEANT something to him.

So the next day, he calls, and says he wants to meet me at HIS house. He wants to share with me what God has shown him. Man, was I excited ! Now HE was join to show ME something ! Awesome !

So I drive over to his house, first time there of course ... and as I drive up, I see him standing out on the street. He is holding his bible, and crying and sobbing so much that I could visibly see the snot and spit drooling from his mouth and nose. He is wearing ragged clothes (I wasn't use to seeing him in these, not that it mattered, it was just different from the norm). And he is apparently preaching to the sky, striking poses like you would see from "the holy people" of old movies and such. He sees me, almost falls to his knees, but stops himself. I park, and watch him walk towards me, and he's repeating verses over and over .... snot dripping everywhere, crying ....

Instead of getting out of my car, he apparently is coming over to my passenger side. He gets in, and starts crying harder, shouting praises to the Lord and such.

I told him to calm down, and tell me what is going on.

He begins to tell me that I have to take him to the nearest TV station, that he has an important message for the world, and IIRC, he is a prophet of this message. The message, is this: the evil forces of the world are about to remove all medicines in the US that have the active ingredients in Sudafed in them from the stores and shelves, and if this happens, God's people will not receive the Holy Spirit, because to receive the Holy Spirit, we all need those active ingredients in Sudafed. Without Sudafed, we will be in darkness and not receive the Holy Spirit. For quite some time now, God had been showing him this ... how important those drugs were in order to experience and receive the Spirit, and Alex was confused about how much he was supposed to take in order to please the Lord, what specific dosage. The day before when he came over to meet me at my apartment, that night he was going to experiment and take as many as possible ... and after I gave him the message to "take two pills and call me in the morning," he knew that if he had taken the whole bottle, he would have overdosed or harmed himself. So he only took two. He also knew since God showed me that word, that he could trust me, and that I wouldn't lead him astray ;-) And now, he needed me to take him to the closest station (I actually knew one that was within 10 miles, major metropolitan area). And there he would give his message to the world, and he thanked me for helping him not to overdose and harm his body, and for being obedient.

I heard all he had to say ... and I sat there in utter disbelief haha. I mean, I had heard some insane things ... but, we needed Sudafed to have the Holy Spirit ? It became clear in an instant, that Alex was addicted to drugs, which explained a lot of his behavior ...

At first, I was going to tell him that we weren't going to go to the station, and that if he trusted me, then I was going to tell him he was deluded and deceived. But instead, I had what I believed was the Spirit again show me to drive him to the station ... that I was with him, and it would be okay. So I just let him talk, and tell me more about his details of the Sudafed, the conspiracy, the Holy Spirit, etc. IOW, I got to KNOW him. And we drove to the station ... we got there, it was closed Wasn't even open.

He looked so disappointed, heart broken. And that's when I felt it was okay to tell him that I believed the station was closed for a reason ... and that I had been told the "take 2 pills" thing for a reason ... and it was because God loved him, and was being merciful on him, but he was deluded about the Sudafed thing. It wasn't necessary for the Holy Spirit. He wasn't hearing God on this one, and that if he accepted it, I could help him perhaps, if he continued to trust me.

He started to make his case, and started to deny he was deluded of course ... but that's when I reminded him that he also believed God had spoken to me, and that he could trust me, and I told him I believed I was supposed to drive him to the station ... and yet it was closed, and I took that as a sign. He started to listen to me some, you could see it ... you could see his wheels started turning. "Could I really be wrong ?"

Now here's the thing ... my natural inclination would have been to label his ideas ridiculous. And label his "beliefs" as insane and deluded. I would have written him off had I known such things perhaps ... such silly things which obviously were "not of God". But that wouldn't have done anything for this guy's SOUL and HEART. I would have ridiculed his ideas, and his beliefs, and what he thought was of God ... and would have been attacking his heart at the same time. His heart was in that treasure. And instead of being part of those things which attacked him and only helped push him farther into deception, by God's grace ... I was allowed to be part of something that not only offered him a chance to see his error, but also a chance to have God DEMONSTRATE His LOVE for him at the same time, through using someone like me ... and instead of accusing him and using my freedom to ridicule stuff, I was allowed to be part of a solution for this man.

See .... the God I know is able to REDEEM the silly and ridiculous things. He can redeem the one entrapped by evil, and use those very things which are wayward, silly, deceptions, to show His love for us and his grace and mercy towards us.

I have a friend in high school, whose father committed suicide, and so he went without a father. He had no religion or faith ... but out of nowhere, he eventually dove headfirst into a version of Orthodoxy. Serious, hard core Orthodoxy. One of the draws, imo, was that one of the "father's" took him under his wing, and provided that role for him that he never had. And nothing anyone could say to him, would change his mind about the path he was taking. He claimed to see a statue of mary blink at him ... it was the only miracle he claimed to see. Now, to me that was ridiculous. It was a deception at work. But I LOVED him. He was my friend. And he wasn't listening to me. What was more important to me than the deceptions, were his heart and soul ... and I did not die for him. Jesus died for him. And I was not his God. God was his God. So it wasn't about touching the "Lord's anointed". It was about touching the heart of someone whom the Lord died for. And his heart was wrapped up in those things I found ridiculous.

I'm not trying to one-up you ... only show you that it's not as black and white as you are making it. Not everyone who is hesitant to "take someone down" or challenge someone, is hesitant because they are afraid of being a hippocrite, or touching the Lord's anointed, or some such. Some of us WANT to challenge and get rid of ridiculous deceptions, but we want to be part of the solution that helps give grace, mercy, love, freedom, and light to the heart that is ensnared in such things. It's not always about the glitter and the statues, it's about those whose hearts are wrapped up in them, and they protect them from those who do not honor or respect their hearts.

And sometimes, some of us DO want to see evil destroyed "because it is evil", or for the sake of justice, etc. I don't know that I agree the way to go about that is to attack the humans flesh and blood, however. Even if I *want* to lol. I appreciate freedom, and grace, but I'd like to learn more about how to handle the people involved, if not for my own sake or theirs, out of respect for the Lord if nothing else.

[/long post]

 

[TillICollapse]

I just thought of a new idea for a game: Hungry Hungry Hypocrites.

Bwahahahaha

 

[contango]

really?go tell a catholic you think ctying stautes are silly, and watch how fast he can say cheap glitter dust is silly. Wouldn't he have a point?

good for the goose, good for e gander, silly is what silly does in both religions.

If we want to argue that "miracles don't happen today" then, as you say, it covers my miracles as well as your miracles. The only alternative is some form of spiritual elitism where I assume that I'm more spiritual than you are because I can do these things and you can't, and unless I know you and can assess your fruit such a stance is arrogant in the extreme.

The problem is the discussion isn't really as simple as that if we accept any form of supernature in the world today. As soon as we accept supernature then, in the context of what the Bible says about false christs and false prophets, we must accept that signs and wonders are not the be-all-and-end-all of the Christian life because they may be nothing to do with God. This is where we must consider our focus.

If we accept that miracles happen and that both God and the devil can bend the rules of nature as we understand them, the question becomes two-fold. Firstly we need to ask whether a report event actually happened as described, and if it did we have to ask whether any supernatural aspect of it was from God, from some other force, or a natural manifestation mistaken for a supernatural manifestation.

Verification is difficult when dealing with reports of healings in far away places. There's no way of knowing whether the person writing the report has exaggerated something, made it all up completely, or is telling the absolute truth. Unless the person concerned is willing to release medical records and the medics associated can be verified and are willing to discuss the case with total strangers, all we have to go on is a claim that "Bill (not his real name) came forward with badly mangled legs and after prayer his legs were restored". In a case like this the very process used ostensibly to protect privacy also prevents verification. Whether this is convenient for any individual minister is something we can only speculate. For myself I've noticed that a number of pronounced healings relate to general aches and pains that go away when the person is prayed for, but we have no indication of whether they stayed away or not. If someone is struggling with ongoing pains and they are healed by the grace of God, this is a wonderful thing. If their aches and pains go away after prayer only to return the following morning, we have effectively reduced the Holy Spirit to the equivalent of a divine aspirin. It is easy to imagine the person whose pain returned in the morning to be less than impressed with the process, and believe they had been sold a pig in a poke.

Determining the source of an apparent miracle is also very difficult from a great distance. Aches and pains can go away based on the power of suggestion, and even ignoring the possibility that the event was natural but looked supernatural it is hard to tell whether it was by the power of God or some other spirit.

Whatever level of discernment we believe we possess we have to be willing to accept that sometimes we get it wrong. It also starts to fall down if we start saying "my miracles are of God, yours are of the devil" unless we can provide something pretty solid to demonstrate why we think that. If all we have is our own subjective senses then we lose any right to reject the other person's subjective senses that their miracles are of God and ours are not. So we need to go back to an objective yardstick and, where Christians are concerned, I would hope all concerned would agree that the yardstick is Scripture.

Even here we need to be careful because you won't find a single verse in Scripture that tells us whether John or Jane Doe is a true prophet. Here we have to look at their teachings.

If John Doe is local to us we might be able to see the fruit of his life. Jesus told us to test prophets by their fruit, so if someone claims to be a prophet but is frequently seen visiting the local strip joint, regularly getting drunk, is never willing to help someone in need, is quick to anger etc, we might stop and ask just what spirit is inside him. If we cannot see his life we can test his teaching - if his teaching does not align with Scripture then we can discount any signs and wonders he might perform - in Deut 13:2 God told the Israelites not to follow a prophet who performed signs and wonders but encouraged them to go after another god. If we cannot see his fruit and cannot test his teaching it's perfectly acceptable, in my opinion, to ignore his signs and wonders, filing them under "unknown". Even here we need to consider just where our focus lies.

If we marvel at signs and wonders we are easy prey for false prophets. If we seek signs over good teaching and do not discern we may be led down any number of bad paths as we lose focus. Signs and wonders in and of themselves don't validate a ministry. When Jesus warned of false prophets who would perform signs, Paul told us to test all things, and John told us to test the spirits, it is nothing short of a tragedy when Christians see what look like miracles and therefore assume the person performing them must be a good teacher.

 

[Andrea411]

If we want to argue that "miracles don't happen today" then, as you say, it covers my miracles as well as your miracles. The only alternative is some form of spiritual elitism where I assume that I'm more spiritual than you are because I can do these things and you can't, and unless I know you and can assess your fruit such a stance is arrogant in the extreme.

The problem is the discussion isn't really as simple as that if we accept any form of supernature in the world today. As soon as we accept supernature then, in the context of what the Bible says about false christs and false prophets, we must accept that signs and wonders are not the be-all-and-end-all of the Christian life because they may be nothing to do with God. This is where we must consider our focus.

If we accept that miracles happen and that both God and the devil can bend the rules of nature as we understand them, the question becomes two-fold. Firstly we need to ask whether a report event actually happened as described, and if it did we have to ask whether any supernatural aspect of it was from God, from some other force, or a natural manifestation mistaken for a supernatural manifestation.

Verification is difficult when dealing with reports of healings in far away places. There's no way of knowing whether the person writing the report has exaggerated something, made it all up completely, or is telling the absolute truth. Unless the person concerned is willing to release medical records and the medics associated can be verified and are willing to discuss the case with total strangers, all we have to go on is a claim that "Bill (not his real name) came forward with badly mangled legs and after prayer his legs were restored". In a case like this the very process used ostensibly to protect privacy also prevents verification. Whether this is convenient for any individual minister is something we can only speculate. For myself I've noticed that a number of pronounced healings relate to general aches and pains that go away when the person is prayed for, but we have no indication of whether they stayed away or not. If someone is struggling with ongoing pains and they are healed by the grace of God, this is a wonderful thing. If their aches and pains go away after prayer only to return the following morning, we have effectively reduced the Holy Spirit to the equivalent of a divine aspirin. It is easy to imagine the person whose pain returned in the morning to be less than impressed with the process, and believe they had been sold a pig in a poke.

Determining the source of an apparent miracle is also very difficult from a great distance. Aches and pains can go away based on the power of suggestion, and even ignoring the possibility that the event was natural but looked supernatural it is hard to tell whether it was by the power of God or some other spirit.

Whatever level of discernment we believe we possess we have to be willing to accept that sometimes we get it wrong. It also starts to fall down if we start saying "my miracles are of God, yours are of the devil" unless we can provide something pretty solid to demonstrate why we think that. If all we have is our own subjective senses then we lose any right to reject the other person's subjective senses that their miracles are of God and ours are not. So we need to go back to an objective yardstick and, where Christians are concerned, I would hope all concerned would agree that the yardstick is Scripture.

Even here we need to be careful because you won't find a single verse in Scripture that tells us whether John or Jane Doe is a true prophet. Here we have to look at their teachings.

If John Doe is local to us we might be able to see the fruit of his life. Jesus told us to test prophets by their fruit, so if someone claims to be a prophet but is frequently seen visiting the local strip joint, regularly getting drunk, is never willing to help someone in need, is quick to anger etc, we might stop and ask just what spirit is inside him. If we cannot see his life we can test his teaching - if his teaching does not align with Scripture then we can discount any signs and wonders he might perform - in Deut 13:2 God told the Israelites not to follow a prophet who performed signs and wonders but encouraged them to go after another god. If we cannot see his fruit and cannot test his teaching it's perfectly acceptable, in my opinion, to ignore his signs and wonders, filing them under "unknown". Even here we need to consider just where our focus lies.

If we marvel at signs and wonders we are easy prey for false prophets. If we seek signs over good teaching and do not discern we may be led down any number of bad paths as we lose focus. Signs and wonders in and of themselves don't validate a ministry. When Jesus warned of false prophets who would perform signs, Paul told us to test all things, and John told us to test the spirits, it is nothing short of a tragedy when Christians see what look like miracles and therefore assume the person performing them must be a good teacher.

Totally agree with you… just summed it up so well. Thank you and God bless, andrea

 

[Andrea411]

do you tell the Lord crying statues are ok as you do glitter dust?

andrea - I don't have much of an opinion on crying statues, other then use discernment… same with glitter.. // although the crying statues bring sometimes millions of people to them… in looking at them this past week… I am trying to see what fruit they bring. As a Protestant it is always so easy to dismiss anything RCC and to even be "ugh.. oh no what are they doing NOW!!! but when I see the faces of the seekers and their heart… I see people who are trying with all they have to draw closer to Christ. The thing I'd need to know is does it produce good fruit or bad? I simply don't know. Years ago, I used to think RCC was pagan but then I actually started reading about what they teach as opposed to what Prot. say they teach…… you know its different. I'm less likely to dismiss the crying statues today then I was a week ago. I am far more respectful of the RCC as part of the body of Christ. I have also found many of their teachings very edifying.


see, bottom line, the frog proved his point, one can't reject anything in another religions mysticism, or "miracles" because for one to protect ones own beliefs in the extremes of their own system, and maintain protectionism, one has to believe in the other religions extremes, or at least not challenge them...that is a fact. One has to believe all, or agree with all, or one can be called various names, I don't mean you are, but certainly you must see the point?

andrea-No, Frog only proved that he doesn't listen to anyone else, but accuses others of doing what he does… reminds me of liberals vs conservatives. I don't disagree with Frog totally, I disagree with his approach -TOTALLTY. I disagree with his sarcasm and prideful arguments and judgments. I don't use the word CHALLENGE bc I am can't judge your experience - if I were counseling a new believer I would ask them to judge for themselves and help them use discernment and encourage them to go to the Lord asking for His giftings or to someone they respect that is gifted. Depending on the situation. I would not mock or be argumentative if someone told me they saw a statue crying. Especially if it was bringing them to a more meaningful relationship with Christ.

You can't say their strange mystic stuff is wrong, while saying yours are right...

andrea - Isn't that what your doing?

How can you tell a Catholic that they are wrong about all their stuff, or another religions things? You can't, why? Because they have you beat, because they can challenge you just as fast, for believing in dust, feathers, or any other extreme silly in our Christian charismatic movement. It is all or nothing, those who don't want their stuff challenged, can't challenge others, whereby their silence is also a form of approval. It has to be, one is bound by their own protectionist, politically correct doctrine of silence, all of which , is clearly proven wrong in the glorious scriprures, that God proclaimed. So the second one challenges another, one imediately has to be a jezebel, or devisive, because he or she is now doing the same action, that he or she has judged to be jezebel..lol..

andrea-I don't tell Catholics that their 'stuff' is wrong, I told you (if you bothered to read) that if it draws them to Christ then it may very well be real. I repeat, I do not think RCC are not saved, any more then I think all the anti-charismatics are not saved i.e.: J. MacArthur I have no doubt is saved… just wrong. I did not accuse you of having Jezebel spirit. Although I think you 'might' have a religious spirit??or a spirit of rebellion - only bc you seem to be unable to note what you agree with… only noting your disagreements?? I'm wondering if when you read your own posts if you notice the negativity and the effects it has on the brethren? You could say the same things and get a more positive response if you'd rephrase them minus the sarcasm? Why not? Time to re-examine thyself… and yes I will do the same.

So really, you can't ever challenge anything, because you you bring a self induced bad proclamtion on youself, by way of a reflex judgment, that is a fact. Good for the goose, good for the gander.

andrea- Actually, I ponder everything…. quietly. It is my nature to be quick, judgmental and harsh…. it is the Holy Spirit that gives me patience, wisdom and good counsel… and the constant hummmm in my spirit is His reminding me as I do you….exhort, educate and ENCOURAGE!! If someone is caught in deception, I have found it is best to encourage them into truth. To prove them wrong only leaves a wound… to educate, exhort and encourage leaves them happier, healthier and more likely to receive all that Christ has for them.

so really, with all due respect, please, be like the frog, and just say no to things, really, it is no big deal, the bible has alot of it, saying no,..THE SCRIPTURES DO SO…..

andrea - I'm sorry Frog, I know you have found me hurtful to you at times, but I really think you have a lot to offer and it is the only reason I continue here…. I question it bc I think the length of this thread only encourages your wrath
luv ya, no offense, with all due respect, just trying to show you something, have a blessed new year, frog.

andrea - love you too Frog, sometimes the people I have the most disagreements with are the ones I find that touch my heart. Really. I'm sorry to offend you but I do love sharing Christ and our love of His glory, grace and majesty with you. Have a blessed New Years, andrea