Posted on 09/30/2009 5:22:13 AM PDT by Jedediah
Methinks your biases are raging forth overmuch.
If the big wormwood meteor/mountain crashes into the Pacific, depending on where and it’s size, certainly the effects of increased water on the shores (however temporarily) of the whole planet would be significant—probably with considerable sloshing back and forth reverberating repeatedly for some time.
If it crashes as some are convinced it will, in the Atlantic . . . then certainly those coaselines would be incredibly inundated quite a considerable distance . . . it would likely shake loose the Canary Island thing if it hadn’t already been shaken loose and that would add to the inundations to a considerable depth and a considerable period of reverberations.
How many hours of such would be too short for you to consider that from the standpoint of those inundated, the sea levels had indeed risen devastatingly?
In terms of the rest of it, I don’t think you have much of an accurate Biblical perspective on the New Testament prophetic either from Scripture and most probably less from first hand personal experience.
It’s not exactly a relaxing thing to be pressed forward of The Lord with His Big Boot in one’s back-side
to speak for Him to an individual, a couple, a family, a church . . . and all one has is the first word or 3. Of course one knows that God tends to expect one to jump out of the boat and then He’ll make the water firm; speak the 3 words and the 4th, 5th, etc. will follow.
And, hopefully, the tangible, experiential ‘unction’ ‘feeling’ of Holy Spirit pouring through one will give some measure of confirmation that one is not just ranting from a pooly made taco a few hours earlier.
And, maybe something will pour forth that you could not have known about the person one is speaking to . . . except by Holy Spirit and it therefore blesses that person as vivid confirmationi and they are all the more open to The Lord’s blessing through the word given. And they are comforted, brought closer to The Lord, healed etc. etc. in lasting very redemptive Biblical ways.
And one shares the last words that seem to be coming forth and nothing else comes and one has the good sense, for once to shut up and let it be and ask the person to prayerfully ponder what of it may be from The Lord.
And, the person likely says, Oh, all of it, all of it! Praise God! Bless the Lord. Thank you! It’s just what I needed. How could you know? Oh, right, The Lord! LOL.
Yet, sometimes one shares similarly and the person bows up and resists and declares one’s shared out of the flesh or off the wall or out of a bias or personal antipathy toward the individvual or some other such claim/blame.
And one takes the criticism to The Lord and The Lord says—OH, NO! YOU WERE 100% CORRECT, THEY JUST ARE UNWILLING TO RECEIVE IT. The results are my business, walk on down the road and trouble yourself no more about it.
And the offended person may spread far and wide what a false prophet one is.
In weeks or months or years what one prophesied will come to pass and the person will either cry uncle or deny still and suffer still more consequences—probably still blaming the “false prophet” that wasn’t false at all.
And, sometimes, whether due to insufficient prayer and fasting or some spiritual struggle within one’s own life, one doesn’t hear quite accurately and one’s flesh does get involved as though it was from The Lord. There’s certainly all manner of trouble, then.
I don’t have the refs handy though I’ve posted them hereon before. There were a couple of instances in the OT when famous prophets truly of God missed it. And they were not stoned. So even your Old Testament standard is flawed—all the more so trying to apply it to the New Testament Church era.
Holy Spirit’s still small voice . . . particularly when one is just beginning to step out into one’s prophetic gifting and/or calling, can be incredibly hard to distinguish from one’s own intense thoughts and feelings.
IT IS A PROCESS TO LEARN TO DISTINGUISH. IT IS OFTEN A TRIAL AND ERROR PROCESS. I would rather it weren’t but so far, that seems to be the case far more often than not—at least with most folks I know first hand. Some have claimed to be otherwise but I’m not often been impressed with their flawlessness near as much as they were.
There’s more safety in following a I Cor 14 model of a local congregaton vetting a given pronouncement. Yet, I’ve seen that flawed as well. Folks give assent to things for more than pure Holy Spirit reasons.
I think . . . my opinion . . . one of the reasons Jedediah and some of the other FREEPER prophetic folks respect one another so much is that we can be quite sternly candid with one another and still love one another and have the relationship even strengthened.
That’s sadly not all that common even in the prophetic—though, thankfully, it is becoming more so.
There is a teaching that the prophetic is to upbuild, encourage, strengthen. I think that’s to be the net effect. However, it is to also zero in on crud and help cut it out, rebuke it, remove it from the individual and the local Body of Christ.
Yet, on that score, Sometimes prophetic types operate in the flesh out of a bias and a critical spirit that The Lord has not finished removing from their lives yet and all manner of trouble results.
And, sometimes, even the most anointed, gentle, loving rebuke meets with a rebellious spirit and trouble is again wholesale at the door. That takes real leadership in those situations.
It’s all the worse when the receiver is some leader stuck on their own press clippings and social status . . . and The Lord has sent an unattractive easily dismissed in the natural almost street person sort of prophet to rebuke them. Seems to be one of His habits. Typically the GREAT MAN OF GOD will bluster and fuss and rant and rave and blame and not remotely hear the prophetic rebuke.
I’ve seen 3 differnt pastors die that way—one within 30-40 days all the way across the Pacific from where I was in Taipei; and the other within the year I’d stated in Arizona around 1967 or 68. . . . when I was the message bearer.
I saw another powerful ministry fall apart and 2 divorces of the Head Pastor’s 2 daughters that might could have been avoided had they listened. I was just one of many speaking warnings to them in that situation.
That The Lord used or attempted to use me at all, in those situations as flawed as I was at the times involved is mind boggling. Yet, HE SEEMS TO HAVE A HOBBY OF USING THE FLAWED, THE BIRDS OF RARE PLUMAGE, THE FOLKS OTHERS MOST EASILY DISMISS. I think it leaves HIM more glory.
Eventually, one learns to hear better and speak only what one hears The Father say. I don’t know that I’m there. I’m skeptical. Yet, I know God is pushing me toward that mark of the High Calling and He’s also enabling, cleansing, maturing me to that point in ways I couldn’t begin to do myself.
I’m just realizing that this is about me. sigh. I hope that perhaps the RM will realize this is all by illustration and not intended, per se, to be about me.
If it’s still out of bounds, perhaps I can put it on my personal style opus in the blogger section.
I don’t really care to get into a . . . water fight . . . about the above. It’s my experience and that of virtually every prophetic person I’ve ever met. Argue the theory all you want. Doesn’t stand a chance against my experience. Nor against the experience of anyone who’s dared to say
“YES” TO GOD’S COMMAND TO —STAND UP AND BE COUNTED— SUCH A DEAL I HAVE FOR YOU—YOU WANTED ME TO USE YOU HOWEVER I CHOSE—I CHOOSE THIS—NOW SUBMIT AND OBEY.
Gulp.
Thanks for the ping!
To me, it sounded like it was an anonymous post, I don’t think I caught the guy’s name anywhere. If it was there, I missed it.
Presumably the role of a NT prophet (e.g., Ephesians 4:11-13) is understood by the one who has been gifted for that role. It makes me wonder about the heart of one that claims to be exercising that gift on an internet forum.
Are the saints trained in the work of ministry? Is the body of Christ builded up by this vanity?
It might be wise to be certain that such a sharing is a vanity. Maybe it’s not a vanity. How does God see it? If He sees it differently than you, you could be in trouble.
Here’s an interesting prediction from a purported power that be person . . . new agey or some such.
Interesting how emphatically it has to do with water inundating coastlines around the world.
http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread476788/pg1
Here’s one I’d not seen before on handofhelp.com website, Iuliana’s testimony, check it out,
http://www.handofhelp.com/test_iuliana.php
THANKS.
Until now.
What he must not do is "make it personal" by saying such things as "you're a liar" "have you taken your meds?" "you're only saying this because..." and so on.
Please review, for example, #150, #154, #158 ... Are those posts not examples of "making it personal" by way of mind-reading and ascribing motives?
Please also examine #155, in which the poster hangs his entire argument from the hook of his own (alleged) personal experience and personal credibility? Is this not an example of "making it personal"? He has, it seems to me, very much made himself (rather than the original topic) the subject of discussion.
Ping to interested parties.
For instance, if a poster said "you are stupid" that would be making it personal. On the other hand, if he said "that's a stupid way of doing things" it would not be making it personal.
I can and do intervene to keep posters from making it personal. But there is nothing I can do to keep posters from taking it personally.
Thick skin is required on "open" threads in the Religion Forum. But every Freeper has a niche. So if the open style is not his cup of tea, he should ignore them altogether and instead post to the "prayer" "devotional" "caucus" or "ecumenical" threads.
Also, post 155 is a personal endorsement or testimony which should be expected on any type of RF thread. If however the thread transformed into a discussion of the poster, personally, instead of whatever he is endorsing then it would be "making it personal."
Reading minds and attributing motives are forms of “making it personal.”
I fail to see how "Still chafing against [whatever]?" is not mind reading.
I fail to see how "Still ... pretending to appeal to [whatever]?" is not attribution of motive (to deceive).
I fail to see how "STILL TRYING AGGRESSIVELY TO CONFORM [whatever]" is not attribution of motive.
post 155 is a personal endorsement or testimony which should be expected on any type of RF thread.
Fine. It still depends upon the poster's personal credibility. Is it permissible in any way to challenge that credibility? After all ... "Thick skin is required on "open" threads in the Religion Forum. "
RM: I am not trying to stir up trouble ... I am trying to understand the parameters of this forum. I find the rules posted on the RM profile page to raise almost as many questions as they answer. Although those questions may have come from a large number of threads, I find this one a convenient location to ask them. Thank you for the discussion.
Ping to interested parties.
I could agree with that if the poster had restricted his comments to "inferences and extrapolations"
But "biases and hostilities" seems to me to condemn the poster himself, or at least to be both reading his mind and attributing motive.
Apologies that this was not included in the previous post.
Get off it. New Testament instruction and operation of spiritual gifts in the Body is knowable. I question the maturity and motive of anyone who causes a public disturbance by claiming and acting out Holy Spirit gifting and ministry.
Sometimes a short English refresher course is posted . . . about
THE DIFFERENCE
between
you, he, she, your’s
and
generalized IMPERSONAL
their, y’all’s, most of, . . . xyz GROUP . . .
Though, it’s a common observation hereon . . . that even with a group of porkers . . . one can usually tell which one’s been most personally pricked, chosen to take the most personal offense . . . by the generalized gig . . . their squeel is the loudest.
Question away.
Jesus was pretty good at causing such public disturbances.
It was a most incoherent defense ... but that's OK.
Even Charles Manson was entitled to a defense.
A tricky art form, isn’t it.
Though, of course,
God looks on the motives of the heart.
. . .
of the rhetoric which is currently
. . .
on trial.
. . .
evidently in some . . . . minds.
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.