The School of the prophets: Introduction

[Deborah_]

Thank you Deborah. I guess my question is, "How does that differ from a teacher, evangelist, or even just a kind person in general?" If I go to comfort a person in the hospital, does that make me a prophet because I am speaking words of comfort? I am not trying to come across as critical, I am just really trying to understand your thinking on the matter so I can ponder it more deeply myself. Thank you

A teacher deals in general principles; a prophet is speaking into a specific situation.
An evangelist preaches the message of salvation to unbelievers; a prophet may speak to either believers or unbelievers, and on any subject.

Any one of us can (hopefully) explain the gospel to an unbeliever, try to say encouraging words, and quote a scripture that seems appropriate for a situation. What makes a spiritual gift different? The effect is more powerful. Somebody with the gift of evangelism will make many converts; someone with the gift of encouragement will be more successful at it; someone with the gift of prophecy will say something that exactly 'hits the spot'. To illustrate... all Christians have an obligation to practise hospitality; a lot of us enjoy doing so and make a habit of it; but if I were to say that someone "had the gift of hospitality" I would be implying something extra - that people were drawn to them as if to a magnet, that their house was a place where people didn't just receive a cup of tea or a meal but were often converted and spiritually invigorated there, and that the Holy Spirit was obviously using them in that ministry. I do not have that gift!

If I went to visit someone in hospital, I might go entirely in my own strength (I'm not denigrating that in any way - we are all called to visit the sick and do our best to comfort them). But I might find myself using one or more spiritual gifts during the conversation: the Spirit might give me a word of knowledge or a word of prophecy that the sick person would recognise as being 'beyond the norm'. If this happened, I might be aware myself that the words I was saying were not 'just from me'.

A lot of the spiritual gifts (e.g. wisdom, encouragement, administration, teaching) are superficially similar to everyday skills. I appreciate that this might sound rather subjective, but in these cases it's the 'little bit of extra power' that is the hallmark of a spiritual gift. As I mentioned earlier on in the thread, I've heard many people stand up in a church service and give 'prophecies'; but only a tiny fraction of these have been generally agreed to be truly from the Holy Spirit. There's a difference between the product of flesh and the product of Spirit; and those of us who are in the habit of 'testing' prophecies probably become more sensitive to it.

 

[Wormwood]

I appreciate your reply, Deborah. I understand your position. I do appreciate the fact that there seems to be a "testing" process in the particular church where you belong. I have no doubt that my views may be somewhat impacted by the terrible abuses I have seen in this arena. Most "prophets" I have seen are never tested, but regularly make false predictions without being held to account, or use their "prophecies" much like a psychic hotline...predicting wealth, jubilee, and seasons of harvest and influence...usually in very vague ways as a means of guarding themselves. Ive had a prophet declare that if anyone came forward, they would receive the gift of tongues. I went forward, and the guy tried to push me down and tried to make me just start babbling on purpose as to not make us both feel awkward up front. I didn't want to fall down on my own accord (or his) nor did I want to just make noises and pretend the Holy Spirit was giving me some gift to save face. Finally, he told us all the Holy Spirit told him I would receive the gift soon. Apparently the Holy Spirit changed his mind...twice.

In any event, I have simply found such labels as highly dangerous in pretty much every case. They are often used by people who want immediate authority and to be the mouthpiece of God in everyone else's life. Of course, if you disagree with them, then you are immediately deemed to be unspiritual. I've disagreed with lots of teachers, people who were hospitable, evangelists, etc. We do so in love and have cordial discussions. Yet the "prophets" I have encountered have always had an arrogance about them that makes them feel that they cannot be disagreed with and anyone who does isn't a real believer. Seems to me the prophets in the Bible were usually very humble people who sought anything but the lime light. Anyway, you get the point.

As for the definitions, I still have to stick with the OT definition and descriptions that these were people who spoke directly from God and heard his voice or saw visions. Especially when there are very specific warnings and condemnations for those who claimed to speak for the Lord but do so out of their own imaginations. I just cannot imagine that something God explicitly condemns in the OT would be affirmed in the NT. I mean, if someone claims they heard a direct voice from God to speak a word to me, I would certainly listen. Its not that I immediately discount someone who claims such a title (although I admit I am very guarded by such claims). It is just that most who prophesy today admit that their message is nothing more than an impression they have in a given moment. Well, maybe that is God, or maybe that is just their own gut feeling on a matter. I just would be very hesitant to label my inclinations as God's direct voice on a matter. I think everyone should.

Now, I am fine if someone has a strong inclination and goes up to another person and says, "I just have a feeling that maybe God wants you to know....x. Maybe its just me, but I just feel that I should tell you that." I can appreciate that. Personally, I don't think that is prophesy, but maybe a word of knowledge or insight. I don't discount that the Spirit could function in such a way. But I just think such things needed to be handled humbly unless a person hears a audible voice or sees a vision. I think there will be.a great many people who will have to give an account for saying God said something that he did not actually say. So, I write these things not because I am a sign-seeking skeptic. No, I just have seen many abuses of this and I want people to have their faith resting firm on a sure word from God.

Finally, I recognize that many of the gifts of the Spirit are not miraculous but operate in seemingly commonplace ways...administration, hospitality, leadership, teaching, etc. However, I do think that these are not just innate skills a person has, but something specifically gifted to a person when they became a believer...that may have nothing to do with personal talents. In fact, I think that many people will only find their gifts when they step outside their personal talents and trust God to meet a need of others in the church (which is the purpose of such gifts, not for vain glory and to get authority over others...as I know you are aware). I guess my point about "signs" is that it seems to me throughout Scripture that prophecy was accompanied by signs as a testimony of the validity of the message. I mean, even Jesus did plenty of "signs" and "wonders" as a testimony of who he was. Of course, he didn't do them on demand for his skeptics...because they had already made up their mind about him. And most who claim to be prophets or believe in all the gifts, don't seem to expect to see the dead raised or the blind given sight. I just find that to be very strange. I mean, to me it seems more supernatural to receive a direct revelation from the mouth of God than to be empowered to heal a lame limb. Yet it seems most in such camps are conditioned to expect God to be giving direct revelations and proclamations every week, but never expect to see a dead man raised. I just find that odd for those who anticipate such direct interaction with the power of the Spirit on a weekly basis.

Anyway, I have babbled on long enough. Thanks for your response.

 

[Deborah_]

I appreciate your reply, Deborah. I understand your position. I do appreciate the fact that there seems to be a "testing" process in the particular church where you belong. I have no doubt that my views may be somewhat impacted by the terrible abuses I have seen in this arena. Most "prophets" I have seen are never tested, but regularly make false predictions without being held to account, or use their "prophecies" much like a psychic hotline...predicting wealth, jubilee, and seasons of harvest and influence...usually in very vague ways as a means of guarding themselves. Ive had a prophet declare that if anyone came forward, they would receive the gift of tongues. I went forward, and the guy tried to push me down and tried to make me just start babbling on purpose as to not make us both feel awkward up front. I didn't want to fall down on my own accord (or his) nor did I want to just make noises and pretend the Holy Spirit was giving me some gift to save face. Finally, he told us all the Holy Spirit told him I would receive the gift soon. Apparently the Holy Spirit changed his mind...twice.

If that's your mental picture of 'prophecy' then I sympathise with your position. I agree with your verdict of 'terrible abuse'. It doesn't sound like the prophecies I hear in my own church, nor like anything we read about in the New Testament, and it's the kind of thing that gives ammunition to militant cessationists. The solution to abuse isn't non-use, of course, but correct use...

Now, I am fine if someone has a strong inclination and goes up to another person and says, "I just have a feeling that maybe God wants you to know....x. Maybe its just me, but I just feel that I should tell you that." I can appreciate that. Personally, I don't think that is prophesy, but maybe a word of knowledge or insight. I don't discount that the Spirit could function in such a way.

In other words, you're happy with the gift of prophecy as long as it's disguised as something else! Seriously, if someone in my church gave a prophecy, this is how they would introduce it: "I think God is saying/wants you to know that..." Because that approach invites (and maybe reminds) the recipient(s) to test it, as we are commanded to do. (And I think the same would apply to 'audible words' and 'visions' - they too can be manufactured by our own brains)

 

[michaelvpardo]

In the interest of "staying on track" and minimizing arguments over issues that I have every intention of touching upon (and the concomitant rock throwing or mud slinging) I'll refer you all to a new post on topic: The School of the prophets: God's rules.

 

[Wormwood]

Deborah,

Thanks for your reply. Yes, maybe it is that we just have differing definitions of this gift. However, I do think that definitions matter. When someone says, "I am a prophet" then I think people naturally think of people like Moses, Samuel, Elijah, Elisha, Jeremiah, John the Baptist, etc. Yet if what they mean when they say, "I am a prophet" is something very different than those pre-mentioned people, then I think that is a serious problem. In my mind, it creates an alternate Biblical expectation....especially among young believers. Consider the following verse:

Hear my words: If there is a prophet among you, I the Lord make myself known to him in a vision; I speak with him in a dream.
The Holy Bible: English Standard Version (Wheaton: Standard Bible Society, 2016), Nu 12:6.

So, is it right to say, "well, yes, I am a prophet, but God doesn't make himself known to me through visions, dreams or audible voices...I just have feelings I think are from God."? IMO, It is no different from those who claim to be modern day Apostles because they want to plant a church. I just think it is pretty clear that when the Bible uses the term "prophet" or "Apostle" it isn't speaking about someone with spiritual hunches or someone who would like to start a home group to talk about God. Spiritual hunches may be accurate and a leading from the Holy Spirit, and leading a home group is a wonderful and godly thing...but I just don't think that makes a person a prophet or an Apostle...at least not biblically. Words have meanings and I believe when you change the meanings of words, you ultimately end up changing the meaning of the Scriptures as a result.

I know that is not your intent, but I have seen it happen a lot. I just don't see a reason to redefine a biblical gift/office when the Scriptures never indicate that God's definitions of and interactions with prophets underwent such a drastic change in the new covenant.

 

[Wormwood]

Michael,

no one is slinging any mud or throwing any stones. Deborah and I are having a very cordial discussion. I hope one day you can learn that a brother or sister in Christ can disagree with you and not be evil. Christians can disagree and still love each other. In fact, that is what is supposed to make our testimony so powerful...not that we all think exactly alike, but that we can love each other even through we may strongly disagree on various issues.

 

[Deborah_]

Deborah,

Thanks for your reply. Yes, maybe it is that we just have differing definitions of this gift. However, I do think that definitions matter. When someone says, "I am a prophet" then I think people naturally think of people like Moses, Samuel, Elijah, Elisha, Jeremiah, John the Baptist, etc. Yet if what they mean when they say, "I am a prophet" is something very different than those pre-mentioned people, then I think that is a serious problem. In my mind, it creates an alternate Biblical expectation....especially among young believers. Consider the following verse:

Hear my words: If there is a prophet among you, I the Lord make myself known to him in a vision; I speak with him in a dream.
The Holy Bible: English Standard Version (Wheaton: Standard Bible Society, 2016), Nu 12:6.

So, is it right to say, "well, yes, I am a prophet, but God doesn't make himself known to me through visions, dreams or audible voices...I just have feelings I think are from God."? IMO, It is no different from those who claim to be modern day Apostles because they want to plant a church. I just think it is pretty clear that when the Bible uses the term "prophet" or "Apostle" it isn't speaking about someone with spiritual hunches or someone who would like to start a home group to talk about God. Spiritual hunches may be accurate and a leading from the Holy Spirit, and leading a home group is a wonderful and godly thing...but I just don't think that makes a person a prophet or an Apostle...at least not biblically. Words have meanings and I believe when you change the meanings of words, you ultimately end up changing the meaning of the Scriptures as a result.

I know that is not your intent, but I have seen it happen a lot. I just don't see a reason to redefine a biblical gift/office when the Scriptures never indicate that God's definitions of and interactions with prophets underwent such a drastic change in the new covenant.

We may be inhabiting different 'cultures' as well.
I'm thankful that my introduction to the charismatic movement was very 'low-key'. It was in a small group meeting, and there was no pressure for anyone to say or do anything unless they were very sure that it was from the Holy Spirit.

Definitions do matter, but who is to say which is the 'right' one? They are linked with our backgrounds, perhaps; I've never come across anyone who claimed "I am a prophet", and if they did I wouldn't assume that they were in the same league as Elijah or Isaiah - such a thing would not occur to me . I'd think that they were arrogant and perhaps trying to exert undue influence over other people! And does one need to have such a 'title' in order to lead a home group or plant a church? People - spiritually gifted people - do these things all the time, without feeling the need to use such terminology.

On the other hand, I have known a couple of people who were described by other members of their church as 'prophets' (in the NT sense), because they consistently brought messages that were recognised as prophetic. The prophetic ministry is much rarer than the gift. But nobody accepted their prophecies without question in consequence (incidentally, even OT prophets were to be 'tested' - Deuteronomy 13:1-5); each one was considered on its own merits.

Is Numbers 12:6 prescriptive - or descriptive? (It is very early in Israel's history, and may just refer to how God had acted so far) Does God's voice have to be 'audible' in every case? Does a vision have to be 'visible'? My own personal experience, for what it's worth, is that it doesn't (but they weren't prophecies, just personal messages for me). The proof of their authenticity was in the outcome - just as for prophecy.

If people like me are changing the definition of a prophet, it isn't without Biblical evidence. Considering that Paul wanted all the Corinthians to prophesy (I Corinthians 14:5), I just don't find it credible that he envisaged them all being like Elijah and Isaiah. And that is the kind of thing that convinces me that the definition has changed - as have so many other things under the New Covenant.

 

[michaelvpardo]

Michael,

no one is slinging any mud or throwing any stones. Deborah and I are having a very cordial discussion. I hope one day you can learn that a brother or sister in Christ can disagree with you and not be evil. Christians can disagree and still love each other. In fact, that is what is supposed to make our testimony so powerful...not that we all think exactly alike, but that we can love each other even through we may strongly disagree on various issues.

You can disagree with me all you want and it won't affect the way I perceive you, but disagreeing with scripture, that's a problem. Besides, according to scripture, we're all evil. God alone is good. So you see you can agree with me and still be evil. The power of our testimony is not that we love each other, but that we love each other in spite of being evil.

 

[Wormwood]

Deborah,

I appreciate your posts and your thoughtful responses. I think we both have a good and respectful understanding of each others ideas...and yes, perhaps they are both shaped somewhat by our experiences. Yet I do think mine are also informed by the definitions of Scripture. I agree that it is dangerous to create blanket definitions by a narrative rather than a didactic passage. I agree that we can't expect all descriptions to be prescriptions of how things always were or will be. However, I think if you look at my post in Michael's other forum on this topic, you will see a very lengthy list of both definitions of prophets and a host of descriptive narratives. I do think that when you have dozens of narratives saying the same thing, then it is safe to make some conclusions...especially when they coincide with the definitions we see given by God concerning how he speaks to prophets (and how he doesnt!)

Thanks again for your comments and understanding.

 

[Wormwood]

You can disagree with me all you want and it won't affect the way I perceive you, but disagreeing with scripture, that's a problem. Besides, according to scripture, we're all evil. God alone is good. So you see you can agree with me and still be evil. The power of our testimony is not that we love each other, but that we love each other in spite of being evil.

Michael, you clearly understand my point...you were referring to me as part of the "perverse and wicked" who were mere sign seekers. I don't think Jesus was referring in general to human depravity in that statement, and neither were you as you quoted it concerning me. So lets not try to hide our intent in our Scriptural citations. Its pretty clear what you meant in your references and would appreciate it if you just approached our discussion in an honest and straight-forward manner. If you think I am a wicked and perverse sign-seeker, fine. I wont lose any sleep over it, but Id appreciate it if you just stuck with your guns and not sugar-coat it with passive-aggressive Scripture quoting methods and then act like you don't know what Im talking about when I call you on it.

In any event, if you would like to discuss a Scripture I would be happy to do so. I haven't really seen you defending your position on prophecy with Scriptures up to this point so I think it is very unfair to say I am disagreeing with Scripture in my comments. Again, Id be happy to look at Scriptures on this topic and explore our differences in a cordial way if you want. if you look on your other forum, you will see I posted and entire list of Scriptures and made specific remarks regarding their descriptions of what a prophet is...and isn't. Id be happy to engage with you in a respectful discussion on those Scriptures if you so choose.

 

[michaelvpardo]

Michael, you clearly understand my point...you were referring to me as part of the "perverse and wicked" who were mere sign seekers.

As I recall, you were making requests for proofs, something tangible to verify not my statements, but those of another participant in the conversation. Whatever is of sight is not of faith and Jesus certainly knew this.
I have no real intention of discussing scripture with you in particular, because you've expressed opinions from doctrines which I believe are false in previous discussions. If I'm confusing you with another staff member, I'll apologize now for it, but in my limited interaction with you, you seem to be an apologist for "doctrine" that is supported by previous church dogma rather than for that which is derived directly from scripture itself. Maybe this is a misconception on my part, but I was raised in a church denomination that placed church dogma above scripture, and left that church at my first opportunity because of the obvious hypocrisy I observed in the leadership's behavior. This doesn't invalidate everything that was said or done within that denomination, but it made it clear to my immature mind that the truth is not to be found in men, but in God's word. My entire life has been a search for the truth of God's word from the time that I was first able to read, but clarity only came with believing the gospel and submission to our Lord's will for my life. I'm not pretending to understand everything, but what I have seen and understood has been enough to change how I view everything and everyone. All things considered, I'd have rather been born a brain damaged idiot who had a genuine faith in Christ, than to know and understand all the things that I've been given and have to fight for every inch of progress against ignorance.
Don't kid yourself, "mere sign seekers" are those that require proofs, and a generation is a generation, not a person (we are just products of our generation.)
Its okay to know where you come from. We all came from the same place. If I hadn't required proofs, I wouldn't have spent so many years studying the sciences in school (I'd have just studied art and literature.) All those things which we've studied and experienced have contributed to make us who we are and everything that we are has been wrought by God in His Sovereignty. I know the weaknesses of my flesh only too well because God in His faithfulness reveals them. Shall I question the wisdom of God? Do you?

 

[Wormwood]

Michael,

Thanks for replying.

I have no real intention of discussing scripture with you in particular, because you've expressed opinions from doctrines which I believe are false in previous discussions. If I'm confusing you with another staff member, I'll apologize now for it, but in my limited interaction with you, you seem to be an apologist for "doctrine" that is supported by previous church dogma rather than for that which is derived directly from scripture itself.

Well, my guess is you have me confused with someone else. I believe the Bible is the Word of God and is infallible in its original autographs. I believe in one Triune God consisting of three persons; Father, Son and Holy Spirit. I believe Jesus died as an atonement and propitiation for our sins and that we are saved by the grace of God in Jesus Christ alone. I do not hold to any specific church creeds or dogma. My church background, and my own personal theological studies are based solely in the teachings of the OT and NT. Although I do try to learn from church history and godly people of the past, I believe the Scriptures alone should be our rule of faith and practice.

Don't kid yourself, "mere sign seekers" are those that require proofs, and a generation is a generation, not a person (we are just products of our generation.)

Well, I wont belabor the point other than to say that when you quote a verse at me of Jesus furiously rebuking those who sought to, and ultimately killed him....its safe to say that you are saying something very negative about me and my desires in this discussion and are not making a general comment about the sinfulness of all humans. I understood the insult. My point is simply this: If someone is going to claim to be the mouthpiece of God and claim the authority of God in their statements to me by saying, "I am a prophet. Thus says the Lord..." I am going to want more than their own self-proclamation as a prophet. Especially in light of the Scriptures I have discussed regarding prophecy, and how God has chosen to speak to his people in the last days.

Moreover, the context of your verse is referring to Pharisees who had, in fact, seen some of Jesus' miracles and heard the words of kindness and love he preached but still hated him and were looking for excuses to condemn him and reject him. This is very different than trying to be discerning and not allow any Tom, Dick, Harry or Jim Jones to declare they are God's prophet and I should listen to them as I listen to the Bible. I hope you understand the difference. So, I don't believe such condemnations apply to me and my attempt to be discerning and understand the role of prophecy (if it has a role given the full revelation of God in Jesus Christ and the full revelation of that provided through the NT canon we all possess). All Scripture has a context, and we should be very cautious when we quote Jesus' judgments and condemnations toward those who hated him and crucified him at others in our discussions. That is very different than a brother in Christ who loves Jesus, and wants to make sure he is following only his voice...and not a false prophet or someone who is sincerely mistaken in attributing their gut feelings with divine declarations. I just think that is a serious abuse of Scripture...and I see it on these forums all the time. Ok, rant over.

 

[michaelvpardo]

Michael,

Thanks for replying.


Well, my guess is you have me confused with someone else. I believe the Bible is the Word of God and is infallible in its original autographs. I believe in one Triune God consisting of three persons; Father, Son and Holy Spirit. I believe Jesus died as an atonement and propitiation for our sins and that we are saved by the grace of God in Jesus Christ alone. I do not hold to any specific church creeds or dogma. My church background, and my own personal theological studies are based solely in the teachings of the OT and NT. Although I do try to learn from church history and godly people of the past, I believe the Scriptures alone should be our rule of faith and practice.


Well, I wont belabor the point other than to say that when you quote a verse at me of Jesus furiously rebuking those who sought to, and ultimately killed him....its safe to say that you are saying something very negative about me and my desires in this discussion and are not making a general comment about the sinfulness of all humans. I understood the insult. My point is simply this: If someone is going to claim to be the mouthpiece of God and claim the authority of God in their statements to me by saying, "I am a prophet. Thus says the Lord..." I am going to want more than their own self-proclamation as a prophet. Especially in light of the Scriptures I have discussed regarding prophecy, and how God has chosen to speak to his people in the last days.

Moreover, the context of your verse is referring to Pharisees who had, in fact, seen some of Jesus' miracles and heard the words of kindness and love he preached but still hated him and were looking for excuses to condemn him and reject him. This is very different than trying to be discerning and not allow any Tom, Dick, Harry or Jim Jones to declare they are God's prophet and I should listen to them as I listen to the Bible. I hope you understand the difference. So, I don't believe such condemnations apply to me and my attempt to be discerning and understand the role of prophecy (if it has a role given the full revelation of God in Jesus Christ and the full revelation of that provided through the NT canon we all possess). All Scripture has a context, and we should be very cautious when we quote Jesus' judgments and condemnations toward those who hated him and crucified him at others in our discussions. That is very different than a brother in Christ who loves Jesus, and wants to make sure he is following only his voice...and not a false prophet or someone who is sincerely mistaken in attributing their gut feelings with divine declarations. I just think that is a serious abuse of Scripture...and I see it on these forums all the time. Ok, rant over.

Ok, but I can review my 900 posts if you'd like and point out the ones where we clashed over the simple meaning of the text and what has been taught by certain denominations as "proper interpretation." However, that would be a tremendous waste of time.
I'm curious about two things with regard to you specifically. First, would you say that you have "the day star?"
The second would be "If you don't believe in prophecy, why do you continuously play the prophet?" (And I don't mean telling the future or revealing new things about God.)
If you don't have an answer to either question, then there is no point to further discussion.

 

[Wormwood]

Ok, but I can review my 900 posts if you'd like and point out the ones where we clashed over the simple meaning of the text and what has been taught by certain denominations as "proper interpretation." However, that would be a tremendous waste of time.
I'm curious about two things with regard to you specifically. First, would you say that you have "the day star?"
The second would be "If you don't believe in prophecy, why do you continuously play the prophet?" (And I don't mean telling the future or revealing new things about God.)
If you don't have an answer to either question, then there is no point to further discussion.

Michael,

I'm sure you can see the difference between debating the proper interpretation of the inspired Scriptures and someone saying, "I am God's mouthpiece. If you reject my voice, you reject God's direct instruction."
As for the "day-star," I assume you are referring to 2 Peter 1:19 and are seeing this as a reference to the Holy Spirit? If so, yes, I have the Holy Spirit. I am a Christian. I know when someone disagrees with your views, the easiest explanation is that they dont have the Spirit, otherwise they would accept your voice as God's voice...which is precisely the issue I have with many today who claim to be God's mouthpiece.
As for your second question, I do not play the prophet. I am a teacher. I teach and help people understand what is already revealed (that is what a teacher does). Obviously, I am not perfect and I do not doubt that there are various things in which I am in error. However, that does not mean we shouldn't have convictions.

Here's the difference as I see it:
Two teachers, Bible students, Christians, or whoever can sit around the Bible and discuss the meaning of the inspired Word vigorously and yet still do it in humility and love. They can both believe they are right, yet recognize that they could be wrong and either way, love the person across the table who is also genuinely trying to understand and apply the Word of God to the best of their ability.
However, if a person claims to be a "prophet," I have found the attitude tends to be, "I know the truth and if you dont listen to me, then you wont listen to God. God told me and I am telling you." There is no appeal to context, the words, or interpretations by others believers throughout history. There also seems to be no willingness to learn from the other person...even if they choose not to accept their interpretation. Its just usually, "Im a prophet. That settles it."

Again, if there is some way you want to validate as much to me, then I am certainly open to it (which of course will result in you saying I'm part of a "wicked generation" who seeks signs). Yet, there are about 3-4 of you who claim to be prophets on here and not surprisingly, none of you agree on anything...especially when it comes to things like Revelation and end times matters. So, the bottom line seems to be that people just need to accept your say-so that your word is identical to God's Word. I dont think this is safe or Biblical. My trust is in God. Show me you speak for God and I'm willing to listen. Otherwise, I will allow the Scriptures be my guide and am open to your reflections on their meaning based how it relates to the inspired authors intent alone. Make sense?

 

[michaelvpardo]

Michael,

I'm sure you can see the difference between debating the proper interpretation of the inspired Scriptures and someone saying, "I am God's mouthpiece. If you reject my voice, you reject God's direct instruction."

I think you need some sort of medication.

 

[Wormwood]

Ok, well if you are resorting to insults, I'll leave this "school" now. Clearly its not a place for open dialogue.

 

[michaelvpardo]

Thank God.