All is proceeding according to plan....
Inside joke....;^)
Posted on 12/07/2004 7:13:00 PM PST by CurlyBill
"A night of terror" is how a man described the time he spent in what is said to be one of Warwickshire's most haunted houses.
Michael Chapman was one of 10 people who spent the night at Shrieves House Barn, in Sheep Street, Stratford.
The 500-year-old building, now home to Falstaffs Experience museum, is said to be a hotbed of paranormal activity.
Mr Chapman, 48, a fine art expert from a village near Stratford, said the ancient building soon revealed its dark secrets.
Volunteers reported feeling dizzy, sick and breathless, and felt icy chills and pains.
He said one woman suffered bruising after being hit on the head by a mystery object and others watched as a picture moved to and fro on the wall.
A photo was taken which is said to show the ghost of an eight-year-old girl who wanders the medieval hallways.
Mr Chapman and his daughter Melissa, 17, were the only two people brave enough to last the whole night - but it is a night they will not forget.
"We were total sceptics. I always thought the dead will never hurt you but now I am not so sure. We felt icy cold, saw flashing lights and I could smell burning - there was a fire here once in which people died.
"I am the most level-headed person there is - but there are things in there that left me thinking perhaps there is more to this world. Even the mediums had to leave.
"I don't believe in heaven and hell but I have to say it's got me guessing. It's a very spooky place." Melissa, a student, said: "I was one of those people who thought this life is all we have - now I am open-minded about everything.
"Something was pulling and shaking me on the night and things have been happening to me since I left. I was at college and someone kicked the chair from under me but there was nobody there. I've also felt a presence at home and in the car."
Other members of the group who stayed in the house at Halloween also said strange events had happened to them afterwards.
Dave Matthews, a white witch and owner of Could It Be Magic, in Shrieves Walk, said he returned to his shop at 3am to find it icy cold. He reports hearing mysterious footsteps and seeing objects being moved around. He then felt a sharp pain in his arm and believes he was followed by an evil spirit.
Another member of the group said she returned home to find the cupboard doors in her kitchen opening and closing and the contents on the floor.
Steve Devey, who owns the museum, said: "We are astounded but not surprised at the level of unexplained paranormal activity"
Luke 9:1 Then he called his twelve disciples together, and gave them power and authority over all devils, and to cure diseases.
Acts 10:34 ¶ Then Peter opened his mouth, and said, Of a truth I perceive that God is no respecter of persons:
35 But in every nation he that feareth him, and worketh righteousness, is accepted with him.
So Jesus gave this authority to the twelve and since He is no respecter of persons He gave it to us also
Luke 4:36 And they were all amazed, and spake among themselves, saying, What a word is this! for with authority and power he commandeth the unclean spirits, and they come out.
John 14:12 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me, the works that I do shall he do also; and greater works than these shall he do; because I go unto my Father.
And here we see that Jesus cast out devils and tells us that we will do even greater works because we believe on Him.
And as seen in Buggman's post (or was it Elsie's) we (that is, each believer) are commanded to cast out devils and heal the sick. Why would God command us to do something if He hadn't empowered us to do it?
Then of what use is the promise? "I'll give you anything you want as long as I want to give it to you?"
Praying in twos doesn't give us a blank check to make ourselves millionaires--however, I have seen some amazing things come out of corporate prayer.
And I have seen amazing things not come out of corporate prayer. Again, if Christ's promises are blanket mandates, why are they not supported both logically and experiencially?
...let's get to the core of your contention: Exactly where are you seeing Biblical caveats to a believer's authority in Jesus Christ over demons so as to cast them out?
Not so fast. Your question carries the implicit presumption of the efficacy of the doctrine of Sola Scriptura. I've already pointed out a hole in that reasoning. I think it is incumbent on you to plug that hole before expecting further progress without modifying your premises.
I can read and understand just fine. What I can't do is play the part of one of Job's comforters, and make excuses for G-d, or rather excuses for a parochial understanding of what G-d promises. If you're understanding of what Christ was saying to the disciples were a blanket mandate, every Christian would be largely indistinquishable from Monica on "touched by an angel." Such is not the case.
This is your non sequitur. There is a clear distinction between the "beloved" such as the apostle John or the prophet Daniel, and more pedestrian disciples and worshipers. Your understanding of "no respecter of persons" is obviously faulted.
And as seen in Buggman's post (or was it Elsie's) we (that is, each believer) are commanded to cast out devils and heal the sick. Why would God command us to do something if He hadn't empowered us to do it?
Have you ever healed the sick like the disciples did, i.e. healed, not eventually got better?
I guess if 'scripture' doesn't REALLY mean what it plainly says (wink, wink) then we'll have to take man's word for what God's Word says.
Specifically... what?
What hole?
And we haven't had a lot of problems with Indians attacking settler's subdivisions out West since then have we?
I agree with you here.
Many are not yet at the level they COULD be - for what reasons one could only surmise. But when we are told to be perfect, even as our Father in Heaven is, it appears to indicate a journey to that goal, other than an instaneous transformation to that plateau.
Inside joke....;^)
Well, the 'Indians'; got smarter - lawyers instead of horses and casinos instead of tomahawks! [they noticed that most of the 'resevations' were actual Nations, inside the US borders, and started acting like it!]
(However, AIM, got a bit uppity in the 1980's [iirc] and kinda scorched the museum in Custer....)
You seem to be refuting your own argument.If at home in the body means being alive(breathing)which is a logical interpretation than being away from the body would mean not breathing(dead).This would still result in being at home or in the presence of the Lord.
If it were, what of it? Wouldn't we agree that God is within His rights to withhold from us things we ask for that go against His overall design? "You ask and do not receive, because you ask amiss, that you may spend it on your pleasures" (Jas. 4:3).
But that's not really the issue. The issue is whether or not the "two or more" clause is a blank check. It isn't. Since a text without a context is just a pretext, let's consider the context here.
"Moreover if your brother sins against you, go and tell him his fault between you and him alone. If he hears you, you have gained your brother. But if he will not hear, take with you one or two more, that 'by the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be established.' And if he refuses to hear them, tell it to the church. But if he refuses even to hear the church, let him be to you like a heathen and a tax collector.Now, is there anything in the context of this statement to indicate that Jesus means that if we ask for a million bucks, they will miraculously appear in our bank accounts, even if we ignore the warning of James? Let me leave it to you to answer this, then: What, given the context, is Jesus speaking of?"Assuredly, I say to you, whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven. Again I say to you that if two of you agree on earth concerning anything that they ask, it will be done for them by My Father in heaven. For where two or three are gathered together in My name, I am there in the midst of them."
--Mt. 18:15-20
Your question carries the implicit presumption of the efficacy of the doctrine of Sola Scriptura. I've already pointed out a hole in that reasoning. I think it is incumbent on you to plug that hole before expecting further progress without modifying your premises.
With all respect, you have not. We've not even touched on Sola Scriptura until now. Besides, insofar as this discussion is concerned, it's irrelevant--regardless of what other authorities you or I might consider to be valid, the Scriptures are our mutually accepted source of authority, so it behooves us both to develop our comments and positions from that middle ground if we're going to have a meaningful conversation. If you want to quote from the Magisterium, the Talmud, the book of Enoch, Hal Lindsey, or whatever as commentary, I certainly have no objections. However, that does not mean that I feel bound to accept any other authority as being over, or even equal to, the written Scriptures.
The Indian Wars were pretty much over by 1890.
Uh uh Uhhhh.
The only reason you speculate any such "journey" is your understanding that you can't perform what is commanded. You're letting your experience cloud your understanding of what the text clearly says. I'm not aware of anything that Christ said that temporizes His clear statements in Matthew 5 and 6. The difference between us is I have no qualms about admitting there is obviously more in play than a cursory reading would indicate..
Then WHY the 'and'?
Ok...
Are you perfect?
Why not a COLON instead?
..away from the body: at home with the Lord.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.