May I suggest this for securing your eternal life?

[John Zain]

Rach,

I heartily recommend that you press in until you receive the baptism with the Holy Spirit.
With this you will receive one or more of the 9 spiritual gifts in 1 Cor 12.
Meanwhile, intellectualizing spiritual matters is a total waste of time.

 

[musterion]

Rach,

I heartily recommend that you press in until you receive the baptism with the Holy Spirit.
With this you will receive one or more of the 9 spiritual gifts in 1 Cor 12.
Meanwhile, intellectualizing spiritual matters is a total waste of time.

Rach isn't the problem here but just to make sure, let's see if we have this right...

You trumpeted prophecies which you impled were from the Holy Spirit, Who you also implied led you to believe they'd come to pass.

When asked how the Holy Spirit - Who cannot lie - led you to believe what turned out to be LIES, you refused to give a straight answer. When questioned further, you tell Rach the problem is on her end because she hasn't spoken in tongues.

. . .

Nope. Not Rach's problem.

 

[Rach1370]

Rach,

I heartily recommend that you press in until you receive the baptism with the Holy Spirit.
With this you will receive one or more of the 9 spiritual gifts in 1 Cor 12.
Meanwhile, intellectualizing spiritual matters is a total waste of time.

Whoa. Okay, I have many, many problems with what you've said. First....I am a saved Christian, I have the Holy Spirit. And declaring me unsaved just because you disagree with me is rather petty, and just down right wrong. Do you know my heart? Do you know my life? Do you know my relationship with my Saviour? The answer to all of those is no, as we've conversed exactly twice in short posts. So I'm wondering why you think you can make a call only God is cleared to make.
Second, I do have a spiritual gift...again something you can know nothing about because you don't know me or my life or how God is using me. Claiming either of the above is just an arguement of ignorance and I truly hope you reconsider such judgements.
And in the 'meantime' how is focusing on God's word EVER a waste of time? Because that has been and always will be, my goal here. Bringing focus and discussion back to God's word.

 

[John Zain]

Whoa. Okay, I have many, many problems with what you've said. First....I am a saved Christian, I have the Holy Spirit. And declaring me unsaved just because you disagree with me is rather petty, and just down right wrong.

I never even hinted that you are unsaved.
If you wish to be clear on all of this, I suggest you consult Angelica.

 

[musterion]

I never even hinted that you are unsaved.
If you wish to be clear on all of this, I suggest you consult Angelica.

So how'd the Holy Spirit lead you to believe a lie?

 

[Rach1370]

I never even hinted that you are unsaved.
If you wish to be clear on all of this, I suggest you consult Angelica.

Okay...so hang on. Let me try and track this.

You make a 'prophetic' predicition that there will be an earthquake (well, you repeat it apparently believing it, even if it wasn't you doing the 'predicting').

Said prophecy was wrong, you said "Oh well, can't win 'em all, it's better to have a prophet who's wrong some of the time, then no prophet at all....I can't remember what the OT said about the matter anyway, nor does it matter what the OT said, as Jesus told me to ignore the OT."

I put forward my opinion on the matter, and gave some scripture...

You tell me I should get the Holy Spirit (but wait, apparently you said it meaning that I should seek a movement of the Spirit to 'get' one or more of the 'spiritual gifts'...not like that was out of left field or off topic or anything, so silly me for 'misunderstanding' your meaning).

Honestly? You dodge the topic and make three statements that basically say "pray for the Holy Spirit", which would imply, without more info, that I don't already have Him. You then say "Maybe then you'll be given a spiritual gift", also implying that I don't already have one...and the bible clearly says that every person saved is given a gift to serve God and his people with (1 Cor 12:6; Rom 11:29; Rom 12:6; Eph 4:7-12)...so the conclusion (again without clarification, which you did not give) is that if I do not have a gift, I am not saved...a conclusion drawn more strongly after the first unclarified statement.

And then you follow it with a vague comment about how it is pointless to 'intellectualize spiritual matters'...such a comment, coming where it did, after I pointed out scripture has something to say about the topic at hand, seems to me to be a blatent dodge of biblical intent and a refusal to believe the bible might just disagree with your statement that 'having a prophet who is only right some of the time is better than no prophet at all.'

So perhaps, if you don't want people to leap to the defensive or misunderstand what you say, you could spell it out a little better, make it a little less ambiguous, or just answer them clearly.

 

[aspen]

Rach, your post is crystal clear - thanks

 

[John Zain]

Rach, I was referring to your need to be baptized in the Holy Spirit
in order to understand spiritual things deeper and better.
And I suggested that you confirm all of this with Angelica.
It's all your choice. As for me, I'll bow out.

 

[williemac]

Rach, I was referring to your need to be baptized in the Holy Spirit
in order to understand spiritual things deeper and better.
And I suggested that you confirm all of this with Angelica.
It's all your choice. As for me, I'll bow out.

As they are all objecting to your patronizing insults, insinuations and assumptions concerning your fellow members of Christ, I have been observing and watching to see your response. So now you are going to bow out. Figures!

 

[musterion]

your patronizing insults, insinuations and assumptions

Don't forget repeated evasions.

 

[Rach1370]

Rach, I was referring to your need to be baptized in the Holy Spirit
in order to understand spiritual things deeper and better.
And I suggested that you confirm all of this with Angelica.
It's all your choice. As for me, I'll bow out.

Oh, of course...it's my dumb....clearly I'm too stupid to be having this conversation with you.
Whatever....cheers.

 

[John Zain]

Speaking of San Francisco, you can expect a huge earthquake there on Thursday morning!
With a resulting tsnuami affecting the whole west coast.

http://z3news.com/w/apology-explanation/

 

[musterion]

Utterly nonsensical damage control for fans of false prophets who CANNOT ADMIT THEY HAVE BEEN REALLY, TRULY and SIMPLY DECEIVED.

This must be the most insulting part for anyone who reads it:

Rick Joyner and Bob Jones have both known about the coming west coast earthquake for decades.

Really? So has every seismologist on the planet. Why? Because they're all God's prophets? No, because the west coast sits on one side of the biggest and most dangerously active earthquake zone on the planet.

Unless you're going to repent of your nastiness in defense of this lie, and denounce the "prophecy" as not of God, you only make yourself look even worse. The people who ran with this false prophecy - including YOU - are just as guilty as the person who made it up or heard it from Satan because ALL of you spread a LIE in the name of God. Don't you see that? You all made HIM appear to be a liar.

Repent already.

EDIT:

Sorry, THIS has to be the most insulting part:

In the interest of protecting our readers from false prophesies, I apply the following two tests to every prophetic word posted on this site:

1. The prophetic word must not contradict the scriptures.
2. More than one person must receive the same prophetic word.

Anyone else notice what test this guy conveniently omitted from this list?

 

[aspen]

the bible is like a picture of god - it's reductionistic nature invites speculation and response

 

[williemac]

http://z3news.com/w/apology-explanation/

This reminds me of the several times that the Watchtower people predicted the coming of Jesus, each time being proven wrong. In every case they had some excuse, but eventually had the brainstorm that He did actually show up...invisibly. Wrong again. Sorry, but that event happened when He sent the Holy Spirit after His departure. His promise was the the Holy Spirit would bring He and His Father's presence into the believer. But this is not the second coming of Jesus. That will not be an invisible arrival. They (the world) will see Him coming on the clouds.

I can say without reservation that an earthquake will happen soon. That's the law of averages. They happen all the time. But anyone who puts specific dates on it in the name of prophecy is taking a real foolish chance, and those who do damage control afterward are only fooling themselves.

I read the above link. They actually think that God will be behind such a disaster. Fools! God does not inflict wrath on the world in this age of grace. If He did, He would owe His Son an apology for taking the wrath for sin upon Himself at Calvary. His judgment has been stayed until after this age.

 

[musterion]

I tried posted a question on that board asking why he did not have 100% ACCURACY as an absolutely necessary sign of someone speaking by direct inspiration of the God who cannot lie. Last I checked a few days ago, he did not deem my question worthy of posting.

 

[This Vale Of Tears]

Vale said:

Well, I disagree that we can't really know for sure. The passage I quoted above (Eph 1:3-14) tells us outright that God is for his own glory....that "he predestined us for adoption as sons through Jesus Christ, according to the purpose of his will, to the praise of his glorious grace".
That "In him we have obtained an inheritance, having been predestined according to the purpose of him who works all things according to the counsel of his will, so that we who were the first to hope in Christ might be to the praise of his glory.
And finally: "when you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation, and believed in him, were sealed with the promised Holy Spirit, who is the guarantee of our inheritance until we acquire possession of it, to the praise of his glory."

That's three times Paul says it in one passage. So I think that perhaps the correct response is more: we can never know the full extent of God's plans and purposes, but we can know what he chooses to tell us. And what I read in Ephesians 1 is that God predestined us before he even created us...chose to bring us to salvation to showcase his glory, and to recieve just praise for his grace.


This is a good point and a very important one to discuss. I think too many people cannot distinguish between the idea of 'free will'...or lack there of...and having no will, personality, drive or purpose at all. For all intents and purpose, being mechanical and our thoughts and actions having no bearing on ourselves, others, or history and life in general.
Clearly this is not the case. Our actions do have consequences, we do have choices...millions of them. But does that necessarily mean that our status of elect or not, was chosen solely by our own will? You've already pointed out that we, by ourselves, cannot seek God out, and the bible confirms that.
So what are we to make of the seeming contradictions? Well....I don't believe they are. Firstly, we must trust in what scripture says: that man is fallen and cannot even seek, let alone find God by himself. We must trust in scripture when it tells us that God 'predestined' us...'chose us'....'adopted us'. HE did that, not us.
But as far as our choices....we can see...daily...that within this earthly realm, and amongst those of flesh and blood, we indeed have free will and choices. Should we choose poorly...sinfully...then it results in pain, confusion and heartbreak. When we daily take up our cross and choose guided by the Spirit...that voice within guiding us towards making the correct choice in the circumstances, then we find edification, unity and praise.
So you see, I do not believe it is, or scripture calls it to be, an either/or situation. God predestined us for salvation, but we daily make choices that see cause and effect happening in our lives.....


I'm sorry, but I honestly can't see how you can think that! I'm shaking my head in wonderment! You're right...clearly we see things differently! For me, OSAS isn't any of the things you just said above. I'm not feeling like you're attacking me, by the way; you're just describing it like you see it, as I am.
Sometimes I wonder....I wonder if perhaps God has deliberately spoken to people differently. Clearly people are all different...not only are their life experiences different, but we have different ways of thinking (I have two autistic people in my family...trust me, they think differently! Wonderfully, but differently!). Does God choose to speak to us in ways that will touch and move us best? Is that why when someone sees something being said so clearly in scripture...others cannot see it? Maybe, maybe not....maybe God is only after the honest seeking that goes on in such conversations. I don't know. What I do know is that you seem to genuinely love God, as do I...and as we touched on some posts back....he is indeed both author and perfector of our faith, so I know we will both continue to grow and learn as he would lead us.
Thanks for the honest chat!

Sorry for the long wait. Between work and family (wife entering 3rd trimester) there hasn't been much time for diversions.

I've long debated on the topic of OSAS and from many different angles. I see OSAS as a battle against uncertainty and, more deeply examined, a deficit of trust. We'll just have to agree to disagree on that. In every debate I have on this issue, I see the end from the beginning because the end is inevitable. OSAS advocates cannot prevail in this debate because it really does come down to an issue of free will. Even if it's given that no single sin can separate one from God (which I believe) "neither death nor life, neither angels nor daemons, neither the present nor the future, nor any powers, neither height nor depth, nor anything else in all creation..." none of these factors impede on freewill which is why I try to demonstrate how central freewill is in God's relations to man. Even hell itself is a continuation of free will, not a fiery pit, but sustained existence apart from the presence of God. Nothing is coerced, nothing is imposed, not today and not in eternity.

Quite often OSAS defenders try to dismiss freewill as pertinent to the debate, but it's a giant elephant in the room that can't be ignored. Ultimately, OSAS are compelled to demonstrate that we entered into faith freely but at some point lose that same freewill lest we by volition abandon that faith. Calvinists neatly sidestep this conflict by removing freewill even in the salvation transaction so that freewill becomes nothing more than a loyal agent of predetermined allotments. OSAS advocates, if they followed their beliefs to its most logical conclusion, will invariably become Calvinists. But becoming Calvinist is repugnant because of the doctrine of reprobation, that is, that those not predestined for glory are by default consigned to perdition; an inescapable fate. So OSAS is ultimately guilty of a partial assault on freewill that stunts logic. Unlike the Calvinists, OSAS doesn't want to drive the sword to the hilt, but the end result is the same; error.

So unable to prevail in a debate by way of reason, OSAS settles on a heartfelt belief that there's no possible way that a person translated by the grace of God can lose that salvation. They emphasis "lose" to steer the debate away from the real issue of freewill, that a person has the ability to choose freely to forfeit salvation and walk away from it. Unable to make the case that a person has lost this utility, they fall upon platitudes, misinterpreted scripture, and asserting their beliefs in defiance of all contradicting evidence with an "I just know" piety. In a contest of rhetoric whereby ideas are advanced or demolished based on their merits, they've won nothing, but they settle for a moral victory of having presented a more optimistic view of salvation. While I try not to be boorish in pointing it out, this is a debate that OSAS can never win.

But I'm sure I come off as the cretin just the same. :)

 

[Dodo_David]

Sorry for the long wait. Between work and family (wife entering 3rd trimester) there hasn't been much time for diversions.

[Congratulations, Vale, on your wife's expected delivery.]

I've long debated on the topic of OSAS and from many different angles. I see OSAS as a battle against uncertainty and, more deeply examined, a deficit of trust. We'll just have to agree to disagree on that. In every debate I have on this issue, I see the end from the beginning because the end is inevitable. OSAS advocates cannot prevail in this debate because it really does come down to an issue of free will. Even if it's given that no single sin can separate one from God (which I believe) "neither death nor life, neither angels nor daemons, neither the present nor the future, nor any powers, neither height nor depth, nor anything else in all creation..." none of these factors impede on freewill which is why I try to demonstrate how central freewill is in God's relations to man. Even hell itself is a continuation of free will, not a fiery pit, but sustained existence apart from the presence of God. Nothing is coerced, nothing is imposed, not today and not in eternity.

Vale, it looks to me like you are begging the question when it comes to "free will", in that you assume what you have yet to prove.

What Bible verse says that God has given mere mortals unlimited free will?

What if this insistence on "free will" is a product of man's thinking?

In Isaiah 55:8-9, God says that He does not think and act the same way that mere mortals think and act.

Mere mortals say, "God must grant man unlimited free will," because that is what they would do if they were God.

Since when does God have to play by the rules of man?