A GAY ACTIVIST BUTCHERS THE BIBLE
Filed under Culture, Sexuality & Gender on November 2nd, 2011 by Michael L. BrownRoss Murray’s article on CNN’s Religion Blog, entitled “My Take: Why Christians are embracing their LGBT neighbors,” is the most recent in a steady stream of editorials and articles on liberal news outlets devoted to promoting a common theme: The Bible really doesn’t speak against homosexual practice and enlightened Christians are recognizing this in ever increasing numbers.
Although Murray repeats much of the standard rhetoric, he does distinguish himself by offering one of more egregious applications of a scriptural passage I have seen in nearly 40 years of studying and teaching the Scriptures. But first a word of background.
Murray is director of religion, faith and values at GLAAD, the Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation. This is a gay activist organization which would better be called the Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Disagreement, glaringly demonstrated in their petition earlier this year which called on CNN to stop inviting “anti-gay” guests on their network to offer opposing viewpoints. (Yes, this is the voice of “inclusion,” “tolerance,” “equality,” and “diversity.”)
In his article, Murray argues that while “there is still a variety of scriptural interpretations, an increasing number of Christians are reading scripture and understanding that God’s design for the world includes LGBT people.” Those who with agree with his position he dubs “good Christians”; those who differ are described as “vocal anti-gay activists” who are putting forth “vocal misinformation” and becoming “more shrill.”
This is GLAAD-talk at its biased best, and to decode the language used, you are “anti-gay” if for religious, moral, social, or any other reasons you do not affirm homosexuality, no matter how much you love LGBT people; you are “vocal” if you write, say, or post anything that GLAAD does not agree with (although those on the LGBT side can write, say, or post anything they want without being “vocal”); you are spreading “misinformation” if you have any scientific, academic, or theological differences with the gay activist mantras; and you become “more shrill” if you do not capitulate to gay activist pressure.
And what is it that drives the views of the “vocal anti-gay activists” who by implication are not “good Christians”? It is “fear” and “lies,” since, in the logic of GLAAD, only fear and lies could cause a Bible-believing Christian to think that God is not giddy about homosexual practice. In contrast, LGBT Christians “build up love and break down fear.”
As for the “good [straight] Christians,” they are embracing LGBT people and their practices because they realize that “if God made them, then [they are] called to love and support them.”
But didn’t God make everyone? Didn’t He make the “vocal anti-gay activists” too? Then why does Murray disparage them? Why doesn’t he feel “called to love and support them”? And aren’t there others whom “God made” whose lifestyles or convictions Murray rejects?
Murray observes that, “Whole Christian denominations have accepted and embraced the reality of LGBT believers within their ranks and in their leadership. Lutherans, Episcopalians, Presbyterians, the United Church of Christ and Unitarians have formally accepted LGBT people within their denominations.”
What he fails to note is that these denominations (or the parts thereof that are gay-affirming) have also moved away from other historic biblical values and beliefs, meaning that their embrace of homosexuality should be seen as a sign of spiritual regress rather than progress.
In similar fashion, he points to the large ideological gap “between those ages 18 to 29 and those ages 65 and older . . . with younger Americans gravitating toward [LGBT] equality,” without pointing out that surveys indicate that less than one percent of these young people have a biblical worldview.
But all this is standard fare. It is his closing (mis)use of Scripture that is so troubling.
He writes, “Those who oppose equality can call it what they like, but the reality is that we are living in a society that has learned how to value LGBT people as they would others. That attitude doesn’t rely on fear or lies, but on caring relationships and trust. It lives out the apostle Paul’s wish for the Corinthians that someday we will know fully, even as we are fully known. It is a biblically informed reality that is helping to make the world a better place.”
What does Murray mean when he speaks of “the apostle Paul’s wish for the Corinthians”? He is referring to 1 Corinthians 13:12, which is not a “wish” but rather a prophetic anticipation of what will happen when Jesus returns. At that time, Paul writes, “I shall know fully, even as I am fully known [by God],” in contrast with our present, earthly state, in which “we see in a mirror dimly” and “know in part.”
So, the glorious hope that we will know God fully at the second coming of Christ is twisted into a wish that we will get to know LGBT people better, thereby making the apostle Paul, arguably the strongest voice in the Bible against homosexual practice, into a gay advocate.
This is what happens when GLAAD does theology. Would it be an overstatement to call this a perversion of the Scriptures?
Dr. Michael Brown is the author of A Queer Thing Happened to America and the host of the nationally syndicated talk radio show The Line of Fire on the Salem Radio Network.
Tags: acceptance, christianity, CNN's Religion Blog, diversity, Dr. Michael Brown, gay activism, gay agenda, glaad, Ross Murray, Scripture, tolerance
Possibly Related Posts:
at least they haven’t said that paul & timothy were gay partners- yet.
btw, see how the media is telling us that anarchy or bowing to bankers is our only options now- either ahab or jezebel; or, put another way, jihad or dictators. it is the mandate of the Church to show that this is a lie- or else we are likely to become caught in a contrived class war.
in Him, Ron M.
Does essential conversion with its born from above inclusion in the mystery Kingdom of God in Christ, coupled with a scripturally indicated adoption beginning of confessing believers in the New Covenant, have ongoing parameters for inclusion and exclusion in His future promises? In other words, at what point does one depart from the faith, from the relationship of adoption, and one’s own responsibility in the equation of being in Christ (with a teleological future indicated for the ‘faithful’)?
When does the NT state that one has separated from God and where does it indicate one is bolstering their position in Christ? How do these indicators affect their access to fellowship, church discipline, and church related service?
Here, the cited article talks about ‘neighbor’ rather than brother or sister. At what point would one not fellowship with a professed believer practicing pattern sin, as to such action being a scriptural obedience, and when and where would one bear with a professed believer practicing pattern sin? It seems unclear as to how one who considers themselves in the faith would respond to the various challenges to inclusion and exclusion raised by our culture’s definitions of such.
answer to #2: Matt. 5:17-20.
Fellowship with believers does not automatically qualify a new believer for immediate leadership.
I was trying to point out that the dialog dialectic strategy employed by the Bolshevics prior to the formation of the U.S.S.R. is the same being used today: if the “church” is part of the 1% (bad guys) and the gays/abortionists/satanists & everyone else are part of the “universal” 99%, this is what I call Luciferian theology. You may say I am being unfair; I say that you are intentionally dismissing the Bible as Final Authority when you do this, replacing it with “evolved” committee as greater authority. The True Church needs to disassociate herself from this model entirely before we can talk about the Love of God. This requires mature leadership.
In Him, Ron M.
R.D.M.,
I appreciate your response, but have to tell you that your first posting did not appear under “comments” when I wrote what now appears as my posting being #2. When I posted it to Dr. Brown, for my inquiry of Him, it was not actually posted to respond to anything other than his article. I hope he finds time to address these questions put to him when he may. My question was then made to him about interfacing and fellowshiping with those in pattern sin; the scriptures seem to give dual messages on this. And, it seems to be a dynamic in play in these kind of interchanges when commenters identify themselves as in one camp or another.
It was then not a question on leadership, which has many other qualifiers that seem more obvious in scripture.
By the way what you have posted is relevant and interesting.
I think this might just be one of those things were He might just awaken more believers. In the holy Torah, there’s no escaping the fact that homosexuality is a serious sin (for the sake of argument, I’m just saying homosexuality). In the NT, since it doesn’t need to actually repeat ALL of the sins again, it briefly covers some of the things but doesn’t go into too many details outside of Romans. It does clearly state that the “sexually immoral” will not enter the Kingdom of God. What is sexual sin?
Torah tells you. There’s not even a chance to claim that Paul isn’t to be trusted (which I’ve read) or that it was taken out of context (which I’ve read) or Jesus did away with the law, including sexual sins (again, read). That’s why it’s important to “Repent!” and go back to the Scriptures.
Just a thought…
Jabez:
Anyone may enter the Kingdom of God by repenting of their sins and accepting Jesus of Nazareth as Messiah and King-over-all. But the definition of “sin” cannot change with the culture, though the “fulfillment” of Law is a process and ongoing doctrinal debate. I believe this is what you were asking: how have Absolute Commands changed in the past 2000 years?
This is where “elders” (leadership as defined in OT Hebrew and NT Greek, not excluding “deacons” and “bishops” ) come in to sort out answers to questions such as yours. To Catholics, the Bible is the BASIS for the Pope’s “final authority”, but not THE authority as in more recent Protestant thinking (going beyond the Senior Pastor having “final authority” over a local flock) that would resemble the First Jerusalem Church. How do you avoid anarchy? This was the predicament Paul found himself in concerning the Gentile Christians concerning freedom in the Spirit beyond the “law of sin and death”. Now fast-forward to the present (continuing the immediate political influence):
The Pentecostal movement’s absolute refusal to include Ahab as part of the dialogue of repentance for this nation is indeed troubling. If its leaders INSIST on following the campaign rhetoric of the 1% (economic czars with the church hierarchy tagging along behind, as usual) the Republicans will most likely lose next year’s presidential election. The secular media doesn’t completely dictate what Americans believe; it partly reflects current issues also, and the voters are in no mood for another dictator.
The Democrats are firmly entrenched in the far left. For the GOP to stubbornly hold to the far right is very unwise. If “repentance” still means defeating Democrats in elections (no matter what is said publicly) the Church hasn’t even begun to repent, and we deserve judgment. This is not a political game; God looks at the heart; let us look to the heartland, to the roots of our faith, rather than corporate greed, for our answers.
Jesus was painted as effeminately submitting to the cross for centuries; more recently, He has been slandered as having sex with Mary Magdalene. If making a comment about Paul insults someone like saying something about Mohammed does to the Muslims or Moses to Orthodox Jews, it shows the traditional Gentile Christian mindset, and who is truly worshiped. Jesus MUST become our Savior and Lord. This, then, defeats the “deeds and doctrine of the Nicolaitans” (Rev.2) and restores the Servant-Leader model. We ALL are called to be “kings and priests” IN the Lord, but there is a PROCESS by the Holy Spirit, Who CANNOT contradict the Father or Son (Word of God, John 1). Can we allow those who favor homosexuality and abortion (for example) to be leaders in the Church? If the Bible is the Final Authority, the answer is NO. If Church leaders are the final authority, then they have REPLACED the Bible, and some, myself included, would call that heresy. This may not answer all your questions, but it gives an overview of how the Bible is viewed in modern-day religious denominations.
In Jesus’ love and name, Ron David Metcalf
R.D.M.
I went to Post Grad Seminary and did Messianic Studies at a Graduate Institute afterwards. I understand church government. My inquiry is not really answered by your take on “absolute commands,” per se, nor by absolutes referenced to Kings of Judah or Israel in the era of the Tenach. I appreciate your zeal for your perspective, but my questions are New Covenant based.
Paul said, “accept one who is weak in the faith,” in later Romans, and I am inquiring about those nuances of M.B., and so for many reasons. The fact remains that 1 John instructs with both not continuing in [pattern] sin to belong to Christ, and says, also, “if we say we have no sin, we are none of his”. It seems NC absolutes then are not perfectionistic ones, in the sense of the law as was standardized as applied to the Tabernacled chosen nation, as to forbearance and, as James discussed, prayer for those who have not sinned unto death.
You might read Romans 12:9-15:9. It may grant you the perspective on which I inquire of M.B..
Peter, when making his confession of Jesus as Messiah, was praised, and reinforced as to the example he uttered that on such a confession of faith Jesus would build his church. Yet Peter went through a repentance cycle after this, in denying Jesus, and later being asked of Jesus thrice if Peter loved Him (the Greek on the love words interchanged is telling too of more than absolute rules on sin). He referred to himself too as a man with unclean lips, yet was chosen and changed in many ways over time (per the Acts accounts). So, perhaps laying more scriptures out here for consideration of my question is in order, rather than somehow associating the absolutes you are referencing. The Ten Commandments, and lists made by Paul, Peter, James, and John do reiterate many OT standards, we agree. But this is not the matter of my inquiry. So I was made of M.B. as a teaching elder FYI.
Pardon the reversed I John references above; John stated “if we say we have no sin we lie and the truth is not in us” so there is something about those of faith bearing with those of weak conformity to the standards which is in play in my question. My own understanding is that we are to have the very heart of Christ as adopted children of God and will extend His compassion in many ways. What comes up too is the example of the man living with his father’s wife in I Cor., who Paul instructs to turn over to the Satan, and, who apparently repents and is weighed down with godly sorrow in time, where apparently Paul instructs the Corinthans to permit him to return to their fellowship. The latter action seems compelled by the forbearance notion and by monitoring the person who was turned over after the fact and as to the absolute sexual standard crossed not undoing the opportunity for repentance after the fact.
Yes, Jesus and John the Baptiser did teach repentance to enter the Kingdom, and confession of faith, and, as the Commission clarifies, teaching ALL that Jesus shared and discipled by which his immediate Apostles comprehended. In fact, in Acts, the teaching of the Apostles is sacrosanct more than any passing away Tenach Mosaic Covenant absolutes. The challenge in setting standards seems to be to distinguish which were for the Tabernacle and Priest covenant people, and which carry forward. Certainly Levt. 18 on sexual standards is carried forward by marriage being honored, and by Paul, Peter, James, and John’s lists of Sins. My question is not really about sins, standards, absolutes, etc. It is about forbearance.
I submit that the only difference in the Old Covenant and the New is the Blood of Jesus and the Law being written on our hearts rather than on stone (“the letter”). The Holy Spirit was manifest in the OT, but not to the extent of the New. Would you agree that the latter part of Joel 2 has not yet been fulfilled?
Matt. 5:17-20 certainly speaks of Absolutes, and it is Jesus speaking. What comes after is not better than what went before in this respect; that is, Paul and the other Apostles never usurp Jesus: so what He says must become penultimate. The Gentile Church has no trouble in saying that Jesus supercedes Moses, but quite a bit of difficulty thinking that Jesus also supercedes Paul. The analogy comes from the OT, where Jerusalem is declared “higher” than other mountains.
Thus, Paul becomes the first Christian theologian, filled with the Holy Spirit, but never Savior and Lord: only Jesus sets us free, because He said so! It is agreed that Jesus fulfilled the Law; but until heaven and earth pass, the Law remains in effect. This is as a tough one for Gentile Christians to understand as the Pharisees trying to condemn Jesus for His forbearance. Paul and Dr. Brown can give you much insight into the mysteries of the kingdom; but the challenge remains the same when Jesus says, “FOLLOW ME!” You are a leader: what does the Holy Spirit say to you about forbearance? Love is patient, kind… but God by no means pardons the guilty! We don’t beat our friends heads with a cross, yet we warn of the Judgment. Life is still short, and God never changes.
I had a high school friend, one of my best buddies, who couldn’t stop drinking. This went on for years and years, until God separated us, putting a spiritual gulf between us. God is not willing that he should perish; yet there came a line in the sand where it was hurting my walk with Jesus. We overcome by Jesus’ blood and our testimony.
In Him, Ron M.
R.D.M.,
Not sure what your argument is about here, it seems to be your lover’s quarrel with a false dichotomy. What seems to be missing in the above attempted polemic is that Paul’s teaching came directly from Jesus, where he conducted a continuous conversation with Him while interfacing with the Gentiles, and was so predisposed for the Jerusalem Council of Acts 15. Certainly forbearance is not a polemic with standards of the NT at all. The NT does not present either forbearance or standards, it presents both. So, I continue to seek the response of M.B. here.
Oh, and thnaks for the reflection on Jesus’ forbearance of the Scribes and Pharisees, helpful. It does raise how does one interface with religious form instances in meeting based behavior as a further consideration.
I am in agreement that Jesus is Lord of the Church and of Eschatological futures for Israel and the Church. In fact, I am zealous for the King of the Kingdom to disciple all His followers, none other.
Gentlemen, may I remind you to follow the forum guidelines and limit your posts to that which is directly relevant to the current thread, which is determined by the article in question? Should you wish to have a theological discussion about unrelated subjects, please find another thread for that, or else carry that on privately between yourselves. Thanks so much!
M.B.
I had hoped your offering comments on my questions could have then led to examining the notion of defamation vs. Christian forbearance, which it seems the opposition is presenting as a challenge.
Opposition? I’m praying that both of us will have our audience with Michael Brown (perhaps for different reasons), but much more importantly, that God will grant us an audience with Jesus. The latter may not look good on our resumes (as with Noah) but the saints will recognize the change (as with Job).
As to relevancy, what I saw in the present article, also in past articles, was that the news media (in this case CNN) is championing a liberal (as in left-wing rather than Biblical “beneficial”) replacement theology. Grace vs. law is also relevant in nearly any “dichotomy” issue concerning sin. Also, my “love affair” with Jesus might be something you could address in general. I am not against Paul; but I see nowhere that he measures up to our Bridegroom.
In Jesus’ love and name, Ron David Metcalf
RDM,
Opposition as is defined by the article here. As for what Paul taught and Jesus, I would suggest looking in a red letter=the words of Christ Bible, and going through Acts to see the direct relationship. Also Paul clarified what the Gospel is three times in his letters, calling its descriptors “My Gospel”, so as to not be confused by post First Century additions (including the misuse of the phrase full Gospel, as such).
Yes, certainly the media is permissive, being popular ideology centered, rather than word of God centered. It will reflect the spirit of this world. Perhaps the 1950s was the last decade where the media reserved allusion to the Bible as a source for moral and ethical authority.
FYI, I am not seeking an audience with M.B., just a certain clarification on forbearance vs. a falselydeclared media outlook on Christian standards.
As for an allusion to a “lover’s quarrel”, what Paul taught was underscored by the direct access he had historically in Arabia with Jesus, then at other red letter points. It is no accident that the doctrines of the faith, as justification, sanctification, the flesh vs. the Spirit, etc. were largely penned by Paul–as Jesus clarified these to be by His Life and by direct discipleship of Paul. This gave Paul an eyewitness perspective largely offered after the Resurrection alone. The eyewitness test of Apostleship has not been replaced by other takes on the Ephesians ministry lists.
And so, on topic, Paul shared…
Rom 13:12 The night is nearly over; the day is almost here. So let us put aside the deeds of darkness and put on the armor of light. 13 Let us behave decently, as in the daytime, not in carousing and drunkenness, not in sexual immorality and debauchery, not in dissension and jealousy. 14 Rather, clothe yourselves with the Lord Jesus Christ, and do not think about how to gratify the desires of the flesh.
This centricity of advocacy certainly differs from what the article accuses those of discipleship to Jesus being about.
Jabez:
“Audience” as in at least a reply instead of a scolding. I have noticed a propensity by some Christian leaders to debate with detractors (even when they vilify) and ignore supporters, as if those already in the camp don’t matter. While this might be a good “general” strategy, I’m not sure it should apply to the army of the Lord.
Academic Christian hermeneutics is neither my forte nor favorite; I knew of Dr. Brown from the Brownsville days, and must be careful how I present what I know. When silence is the feedback norm, someone with something to say eventually goes somewhere else, leaving only those content to sit and nod. Thus the “popular” ministries become one-dimensional, working until the fellowship implodes into a stereotypical yawn, or dramatically disintegrates.
When I declared that Ahab must die before Jezebel could be dealt with a few years ago (in a certain “platoon”) I was branded a traitor. That the watchman report proved accurate doesn’t seem to matter, I’ve found; loyalty in the ranks is the main thing, instead of Truth. In looking for reassignment, I’ve been disappointed several times already.
Per Galatians, I’m assuming that you agree with Paul’s assessment of Peter and John, as they were also Apostles. If “My Gospel” constantly involves one-upmanship, I disagree; that’s not my definition of unity. But I bless your continued blogging efforts with success.
In Him, Ron M.
Ron, I know your last comments were directed towards Jabez, but if there’s a larger point you’re making in terms of “silence” or “loyalty,” I’m missing that point. The reason we tackle controversial subjects openly online and over the air is to stimulate healthy discussion, not uniformity (except around the convictional issues, as much as possible). As for my interaction, there are hundreds of posts on many subjects on several sites, and I am able to interact occasionally, and I do my best to interact with those who are “outside” our camp.
In any case, again, I’m not sure if there was a point you were trying to make with regard to this ministry here, but to repeat, if you were, I missed it. Feel free to clarify.
Ron M.,
You seem to be commenting on religious practice in meeting based assemblies past operating as you mention, of some kind of assembly based ways and means embraced from stages as to practices, prophetic utterance, and values of persuasion, per se. You seem to be saying that the communication assumption in such settings–happening as a one way event and genre of assembly primarily formed of listening to podium based leadership staements on ongoing happenings–caused those not personally in the loop of speaker-responder special engagement to eventually go away.
You seem to be saying that prophetic utterance was a norm for these assemblies, with few other avenues of personal audience based expression, and that on the occasion you mention (where you offered such an utterance) it was neither judged by the prophets so declared and present, for your word’s acceptance or rejection, or that a cold silence was the response. This was difficult for you seems to be carried forward in your remarks here.
FYI such an isolating experience was not unusual during the charismatic years of emphasis among those of a Pentecostal persuasion who clung to pulpit based phenomenological leadership as most meaningful and important in their own hearts. Itching ears of churned up feelings riding on the stimulus/response of speaker commands and paced words is a common remembrance among many so meeting in that religious season of American Charismatic so-called renewal.
Many books have been written on what worked, and did not work, and on those hurt and those edified from such experience. Your reflection is neither unusual stemming from such assembly based environments, nor does it make you wrong or somehow inappropriate when you attempted an alike means of communication in such an assembly. Because of what you shared, above, it seems you personally have leftovers from that season of religious experience which are not fully resolved in your understanding or heart.
I think it is healthy to detach NT Biblically described First Century assembly records of Paul’s expectations– regarding assembly conduct with gifts in operation–from such past personal investment of participation in such circles as I mention here in recent times. This holds especially if your person became heavily invested in such a phenomenologically based meeting based gathering as to conditioning, personal investment of time and expectation, and phenomenological meaning claimed as meaningful, as was thus waiting in the wings so to speak for your turn to become like those you beheld. FYI multitudes among such assemblies did not ever come to experience their turn, though stirred up by what occurred indeed in such assemblies and expecting to in time.
Unfortunately, in many instances, for example of the alike 20th Century Charismatic movement assemblies, the model of religious orchestration was not a maturing and inclusive model, but a top down and existentially isolating model. It primarily was edifying for those at the pulpits rather than for those among the pews or chairs. For sound reasons you may wish to detach from any such past expectation, emphasis, or lingering remainder of any codependency of past orchestration of such a speaker-responder limited communication connection [where it was unclear as a responder where the speaker stopped and you started as a living soul and what was really happening as such], and simply go to your own prayer closet for affirmation from the Father, or to a sober Christian and psychologically merged Pastoral based counseling, and begin to look to Jesus to sort out how, when, and where you experienced the disconnection you allude to above. Am I understanding you correctly? Have you fully recovered from this experience?
Dallas Willard has succintly addressed the body of Christ renewal need for all believers to be discipled by the mind of Christ rather than by some other assumptions of the operations of religious meetings based on on cue behaviors made by related commanding personalities. Unfortunately, the power of suggestion, the limits of human understanding, pump em up and whip em up assemblies, maturity crippling adult-child transactional posturing, the empowerment felt often primarily by those speaking and orchestrating from stages and pulpits (and not those not on stage in the assembly), the cult of personality as it works out its petty loyalties assumptions over time in conducting such assemblies, and the feelings arising of all so associated: do not necessarily impart a maturing model for becoming like Jesus by such “gifts and ministry” thus assuming and operating group religious assemblies.
After such assembly trends there remain some leftovers of some who were hurt, were existentially disenfranchised, and lost in the past “fun houses” of such supposed gifted as active meetings: which you seem to be mentioning above. I personally had to work through many fetters and codependencies inherited from about ten to twelve years spent in such collective environs. The assumptions of ministry sadly often fractured and fragmented the supposed “flocks” beheld from stages as a direct effect of meeting based assumptions of a meeting based experience religion, rather than a grace and truth based discipleship to the person and mind of Christ. The good news is that one can fully recover, count their losses, regroup from within, and go ahead in the New and Living Way of Jesus Christ.
I feel this comment is on topic because every magazine founded in the name of Christian Revolution has a responsibility to organize its related advocacies, as I believe this one’s associated ministries indeed have.
A more complete communication process would include offering a maturing model for forming disciples of Christ than what you mentioned above apparently has [e.g. by the Commission given the Apostles by Jesus himself]. Even so, we look through a glass darkly, and aim toward the will of the One in heaven, as is appearing brighter and brighter until that Day.
Ron,
If requested to, I can go back through the stream of consciousness response to your postings, and chop it up into shorter thoughts and shorter sentences; let me know ir that would be helpful here….
“A more complete communication process would include offering a maturing model for forming disciples of Christ than what you mentioned above apparently has [e.g. by the Commission given the Apostles by Jesus himself].”
This is the point. I Haven’t been thrown into a miry well or killed between the porch & altar; I’ll get over it with God’s help, which begins with forgiveness.
You aren’t the only one reading these posts. There are various ways to release the “burden” (without having to walk naked and barefoot in Egypt). Thanks for continuing to provoke me about this; I most likely wouldn’t have gotten this far without you.
The window of repentance that began on 7-7-7 will end with the 11-11-11 gatherings. Republicans still haven’t repented of their greed; Democrats still haven’t repented of their sexual sins. But God will hold some U.S. Church leaders responsible for not sounding the alarm; for pointing fingers at the other camp instead of leading us into genuine repentance. (Recall your comments about the kings of Israel.) Complicity and accepting bribes are the charges. “The woes of 2012″ spoken by a few don’t have to happen; but the Church MUST take the lead rather than continuing to play politics.
I could go on and on; but God has taught me brevity; it is easy to go beyond what is required.
In Jesus’ love and name, Ron David Metcalf
R.D.M.,
Your response is quite cryptic at best. You seem to equate national political parties with some notion of accountability to the church. As for confirmation of my earlier posts being your experience, dialogue is not forthcoming, so, that hypothesis remains total conjecture. I remain unclear on what you think you have done in terms of giving a warning, where that occurred, and what you think that means in reference to the original article here. You seem to be saying that some ominous consequence is soon at hand due to the national political situation not addressing the heart of need for repentance among the household of God.
So, this couched delivery of information you regard seems to carry as much manteled religious language as it does advocacy for change in regard to the repentance signals of church leaders. What remains cryptic is what you yourself are attempting to achieve, how your yourself are set in a church reference, and how you see yourself in posting such cryptic and yet politically intensive references about the USA. Since the liberal press is declaring in this article that the church is defaming homosexuals, is it not rather that the world has shifted indeed to saying good is evil and evil is good? In such a climate of doublespeak and confusion who will sound the clear standard for a dissipated nation? It begins with such responses as found here in the VOR, and too its reflections of actions taken by its contributors to “confront the culture” and uphold the word of the Lord.
To avoid confusion, Dr. Brown knows that these charges aren’t made against him; but I need to make that clear to his readership. I suppose the “cryptic” response is necessary for those who understand the history of what I am talking about. For the rest, Jabez has brought up some very good points. I leave it to others to continue this discussion. Thanks,
In Him, Ron M.
Ron M.,
I would like to personally dialogue for purposes of clarity and understanding, and my own calling to the whole people of God, in Christ. (jaych.1@juno.com)
As long as all the gays and lesbians know what the bible says on the subject, which is a man should not lay with another man nor a woman with another woman…Sodom and Gomarah was destroyed for for their sinning ways, the two angels blinded all the gay men. We are to love all our fellow humans but hate the sin. People who want to follow this path! you have free will to do what you like. Just the same as regular man and woman commiting adultery…just don’t expect to enter eternity in the company of God, trying to overcome these traits in your nature would be “pick up your cross and follow me” but well rewarded in the end. Your destiny is in your own moral or in-moral ways.
To say that christians are understanding that the Bible really doesn’t say anything about gays is untrue and only in your opinion. God, in His Word (Bible) makes it very clear that this lifestyle is an abomination in His eyes! I am a christian, so don’t assume that christians are ok with the gay lifestyle, because we do not accept it. It goes back to love the sinner and hate the sin, which of course would be the gay lifestyle. The only christians that would be ok with this would be christians in name only.
as the scriptures say: Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils;
Jesus said to his disciples: “Things that cause people to sin are bound to come, but woe to that person through whom they come.
But there were also false prophets among the people, just as there will be false teachers among you. They will secretly introduce destructive heresies, even denying the sovereign Lord who bought them–bringing swift destruction on themselves.
Cryptic indeed. What, for example, does this mean:
“The window of repentance that began on 7-7-7 will end with the 11-11-11 gatherings. ” Is this a political reference, a religious gathering reference, or what? And, once identified, how does it apply in response to this article?
Personally I do have a lover’s quarrel with many other articles posted on the VOR which stirr up muddy waters yet do not often suggest solutions. The VOR needs to become solution focused in addition to alarmist, when needed. It is apparent that what M.B. is now doing in response to the alarm he has rightly sounded is indeed solution oriented, so I support these efforts wholeheartedly. My only personal caution among the winds is that a repetition of certain supposed leadership phases of Pentecostal emphasis past gone amuck (evidenced in the many books on where the Charismatic movement went wrong, by common sense indicators of phenomena, and what its fruit has been) not be repeated. I agree wholeheartedly too with the need to reorient to the Commission assignment given us to the End of the Age of the Gentiles dominating world preoccupations–an assignment to preach Jesus, not we ourselves. An assignment to disciple using the mind of Christ, not our own lesser understandings. An assignment to hone our sword of the spirit to embrace the testimony of Jesus Christ, His Cross, and His coming Day.
[...] http://www.voiceofrevolution.com [...]
Anyway, getting back to the topic, we who are aware, know we are in the “End Times”. It is expected that the Holy Scriptures will be attacked and we were warned of false teachers. The letters to the seven churches prophesy of the church of Laodicea (church of latter days) taking the place of the church of Philadelphia (church to be raptured). In the rise of the Emergent Church we see the fulfillment of those scriptures. The concept of repentance is being replaced by the ideology of equality. The equality being proposed is that of sinners like homosexuals or others committing unholy acts being equal with true followers of Jesus through God’s love, negating the qualification born of repentance.
In a sense, this is a politicizing of church doctrine to bring it in line with progressive theosophic thought. There is no way to get around the clear concept of homosexuality being against God’s design than the verses of Roman’s 1:20-28. But writers who are pro homosexual are given preference in the press. There is big money in promoting the “Gay Agenda”. All of this is conducted behind the scenes, by followers of Lucifer through the various many headed agencies of progressive activism.
How then should we respond? We must compare any and all articles with the core principles of the teachings of Jesus and the Apostles. We who have the calling and gifts of apologetics should respond kindly but firmly, keeping to the core principles, and attacking, not the writer or the offenders, but the concepts being promoted. Those who do not have a firm grasp of the New Covenant concepts will only help the writers validate their beliefs by their inaccurate and/or emotional comments.
Jesus said He came for the sinners and not the righteous, therefore we must encourage all to come in to our congregations to hear the Gospel and we must treat them with love, however that does not mean we should accept as Christians those who have not repented of their sins. A homosexual who does not feel guilt and acknowledge such has not received the baptism of the Holy Spirit, for the Spirit will convict the sinner and try to train him/her into walking in the spirit rather than the flesh. The homosexual who comes to God through the grace of Jesus will abandon his lifestyle (Isaiah 55) and pray through to victory. Those who try to validate their sin will become mockers of Scripture as the pro homosexual writers have.
The blindness the majority of the gay community, and now half of the “Christian” community, has towards understanding the Scriptures can be likened to the statement made by Peter/Kefa about Paul’s writings in 2 Peter 3:16, ” As also in all [his] epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are UNLEARNED and UNSTABLE wrest, as [they do] also the other scriptures, unto their own DESTRUCTION.” It is not enough to simply believe that Yeshua/Jesus is the Messiah, but we must be willing to give up everything to follow Him. Many sins are listed as those which do not agree with the behavior of children of G-d, nor will sinners who continue to practice these things be admitted into the Kingdom of G-d…this is so very serious that is must be addressed with much love and self-inspection. None of us wants to be outside the city- Rev 22:15 ” For without [are] dogs, and sorcerers, and whoremongers, and murderers, and idolaters, and whosoever LOVETH and maketh a LIE.” Yet this is exactly where loving darkness rather than light will lead you. ” Do not be DECEIVED”, is YHWH’s repeated exhortation in Deuteronomy 11:16, Luke 21:8, 1 Corinthians 6:9, 1 Corinthians 15:33, & Galatians 6:7! These are the words of JESUS: Rev 22:11 “He that is unjust, let him be unjust still: and he which is filthy, let him be filthy still: and he that is righteous, let him be righteous still: and he that is holy, let him be holy still. ”
Unholy behavior will not be tolerated in the New Jerusalem, nor will those who love to tolerate it be happy there.
If homosexuality is not sin before God then there was no need for Christ to die for the sins of people!In him there is no sin at all,God is light and light and darkness never mix so which Christ are you talking about?We do not stop people interpreting the Bible the way they want or do what they want as you are in a land of freedom but just know that it is not the same with the kingdom of heaven because God is holy and without holiness no-one can ever see God.When people accept and believe in Christ ,Christ we should teach them all his commandments and he is with us until the end of time so in times like these we know all the tricks of the enemy.
#30. Your analysis is right on. “The concept of repentance is being replaced by the ideology of equality.”
This parallels Obama buying into supposed Homosex “rights” equating with equal opportunity for races. What ever happened to common sense in American political leadership. Michael Brown should research where the objective correlative to the realities of family and normal business life became so skewed by ideology that sin is believed to be a civil right. The Nation needs renewal in Christ, nothing else will bridge and awaken to the credibility and integrity gap. As long as citizenry is meamurized by visually based and assumptively based media, how will the rule of law based on reality return to the Nation?
Before we can fix our nation, we must fix our churches. We must gather together those of our churches who are strong in the 5 core beliefs of the New Covenant privately if need be to win back our pastors and church boards. WE must insure modernizations of the church are not in conflict with the core beliefs and we must also insure there is a mentor for each new convert. This will create a revival as in long gone days. That being said, even though I believe we must do these things, it is not in God’s plan for us to win this time. He has declared in prophesies that Satan will have his short reign on the planet, and for that to happen the true believers and followers of Jesus must be removed, otherwise our revival would defeat him and his planned rule of the world. We are seeing the transition from the church of Philadelphia to the church of Laodicea.
Soon we will be collected in the rapture to insure Lucifer and his followers are largely unimpeded in their takeover during the tribulation. if not I believe we would defeat him, and as stated earlier, that is not God’s plan. Regardless of our knowledge of the outcome, we still must be good stewards of the salvation we have been given, by spreading the Gospel until the last minute.
We know the rapture will be soon, but we do not know when, therefore we do not know how much we can accomplish before then, so let us accomplish what we can. Prayer, fellowship, and genuine love of our neighbors will win the day and when we are caught up, many will believe the illusion presented to them, but many will think back to what we have told them and begin the new (and perhaps underground) church of the latter days, not mentioned in the letters to the seven churches. We have the opportunity to leave behind a legacy for the lost.
Rollin,
This is accurate, except likely as to when the catching up for the Return will occur (this is a matter of literal fulfillment and careful preparation, to keep our lamps trimmed and ready, and per Acts 3:21, where the heavens hold back the return until all is fulfilled, spoken of the Prophets of Old, as Peter stated. And this is in reference to the chosen Land of the People of the Book); so a solution focus for the believers in No. America to work as one in a careful petition before the FAther for consecration, repentance, and Jesus’ Spirit affirmation is in order. Other articles are posted on the VOR address the likely Plan our Father holds for maintaining his witness through difficult times. There is no ‘secret’ rapture, it will be quite visible, as depicted in Zech. Testing is coming for all those on the earth (where, ‘except those days be shortened even the elect would be deceived’). 2012 will indeed try the souls of all. We will be and are challenged to reorient our loyalties, likes and dislikes, and form alliances and mutual support. Yes, the Satan’s season is to be short, but too, our witness is to be strong, available, and reflective of His light.
I agree with you Jabez, up to to point. If you have studied the Illuminati and NWO, you will have come across information of their hidden plans to stage the great illusion of what has happened after the rapture. Two of these projects are “Project Disclosure” and Project Blue Beam” one to explain the rapture and the other to visually give evidence of either supernatural or extraterrestrial entities. So the followers of Lucifer will be the perpetrators, but God will allow this.
If they did not have a plan in place, the rapture would cause so much anguish to those left behind, Lucifer would be defeated by the truth.
Rollin,
I study the Bible as well as the signs of the times. You seem to value the rapture as an escape from something? It is presented in scripture as coincidental to the glorious Return of the Messiah to rule the planet. –J.
Jabez, you have made an baseless assumption. I have given no indication in any of my comments of a desire to hasten the rapture, or any type of escapism. I have called for a sense of urgency to help the lost in what may be little time left and I view the act of stewardship of such knowledge to help others as a bearing of fruit.
My statements of the rapture have been that unless it were to happen, then Lucifer could not be successful in his plans, because we are a very strong and ever growing resistance. We Christian followers of Jesus will pray for our leaders, and we will pray for the lost as well as engage in activism to defeat the NWO’s plans for OWGov, OWEcon, and OWReligion. God answers our prayers, but His prophesies declare Lucifer will have his seven years of total rule through the ten regions (horns), therefore we (the restrainer) must be removed for him to attain those goals. Otherwise our prayers alone would be quite enough to defeat Lucifer’s plans.
As to how I feel about it, I would prefer to stay here during the tribulation to help those who are left behind, many of whom are close to me and whom I care much about, but have not been able to reach. I am ready to survive the hard times of the tribulation times, I can make and hunt for my own food including grinding my own flour, etc. I have the ability to conduct underground resistance and survival missions for starving end times Christians in such underground groups.
I don’t mind if you disagree with me on the rapture, but I do mind being misrepresented as you have done in your last comment.
May God bless you and open your eyes to the spiritual regressiveness of judging others.
Rollin,
I do not hold that the qualifying “seem to” and question mark indicate any assumption whatsoever, but an inquiry. So, your response seems unwarranted, at best.
Rollin,
You stated ‘God answers our prayers, but His prophesies declare Lucifer will have his seven years of total rule through the ten regions (horns), therefore we (the restrainer) must be removed for him to attain those goals. Otherwise our prayers alone would be quite enough to defeat Lucifer’s plans’.
This seems to indicate an interpretation of prophecy, rather than a set in concrete scenario. The first half of this analysis is of majory agreement by amost scholarly interpreters; the last part is highly interpretive as to who the restrainer might be and as to primarily offering a conclusion. Think of this syllogistically. The premise given may or may not play out as described, for, who the restrainer is is not as clear and is primarily discovered by examining other scriptures to draw a conclusion (such as deducing who is the restrainer in Acts 3:21, and it certainly is not believers on the planet, but God’s dominion itself, extended of His will).
Michael Brown has more than one posting under this umbrella on the subjects you have raised about the rapture, and its nature, and what it fulfills, in time. The conclusion reached from the premise differs from your own.
Rollin,
Cases in point for a different understanding than
you have permitted:
2 Thesl 2, where the rebellion against God happens prior to the rapture, and the son of hell begins his work. When the restrainer mentioned there gets out of his way, that one is not destroyed until Jesus appears. There is no interm catching up mentioned whatsoever in the passage. The son of hell is burnt up on the Return, as is consistent with the saints being caught up at the same time in other passages.
Salvation’s completion also occurs on the Return, with suffering in the meantime on the planet for Jesus elect. I Peter, 1: 7, 13 (no secret rapture here); such works sanctification 4:1, 12, 13. 2 Peter 3: 10, 14-16 (refering to Paul’s writings on this subject).
Zechariah has much to say about the matter in the last four chapters, and John in the Revelation. Daniel sets the stage of the son of hell’s own mainipulations and intentions. The Kingdom that comes to deal with all the inquity represents Jesus taking over the whole planet, per se.
Ten regions? Ten EU nations? Ten surrounding enemy camps (Pslm 83)? Ten alliances otherwise not yet clear? Part and parcel of those aligning for the final two battles with Israel? Since any all all are possibilites regarding the 2 Thesl and Daniel scenario seasons–not to mention Israel today acting out its inherent scripts of the Prophets of Old (Acts 3:21 in sum) it simply is too soon to conclude the syllogism by indicators of logic.
Our task is to set a Council for the church at large, to set goals for conditions of the Bride ‘making herself ready’ for the betrothal, on the triumphant Return. There is only one Return, one Messiah, one Jerusalem for his Messianic throne, and one Bible for the Land of the People of the Book, and those adopted and grafted into the family tree of God. No mention is made of Scofield or Augustine in scripture, and their predictions were not based on Is 11:11, but on a belief of replacement theology. You might reconsider your logic and conclusions. In His love, J.
We’re only talking about a seven year period- not even an eyeblink to God- but worst of the worst to the inhabitants on earth.
Except for John’s graphic descriptions, I would say that way too much eschatological energy has been spent on this subject.
In Him, Ron M.
RDM,
Not certain if your comment was about the ongoing interchange here, or on your stated topic in general. I experienced no energy depletion whatsoever FYI, for it seemed like an academic topic to be surveyed from more than one perspective: as was first given as assumed as so was presented here. It seemed that objectivity needed a greater representation of possibility than was permitted by Rollin’s model of future events alone (in fairness, it not being just his model, as it is a widely mentioned one from the last century, and earlier as stated so by futurist theologians).
It was opened by Rollin as a subject believed and interpreted to be stated as assumed as infallible. This was apparently presented on the credence of a report of a supposed enemy of the Kingdom of God and His Christ having plans in response to the rapture of the people of God, represented as being primarily applicable during a future period of eschatological completion. This involved a take on the rapture events given and its supposed play of events, as was then so responded by me. As most such interpretation is speculative at this stage in time, it seemed strange to me to give credence to sources outside the Bible as being authoritative on what the supposed future enemies of Christ will in fact do during the time of His Return. And so too as to what the throne of Christ Himself will do indeed in reference to His Appearing in Glory being stated so to somehow fit the model presented. It assumed specifically what may happen, as such, and, I believe in error, according to the scriptures on the topic in the Bible.
There also was the question of theological origins as to possible myths about the future which were given as facts about it by Rollin. This needed coverage response as to determining the past theological sources for what was presented (Scofield and Augustine. There are others too of such a persuasion from the theological past. Theological history since Jesus left often looks into Biblical interpretation in light of the status of the people of God when such theology is written.).
Truth may or may not be proven of other interested groups published intentions about the Biblically based appearing of the Messiah on the Return, such as those cited by Rollin. It may or may not be represented in the doctrines primarily developed in past time when Israel was not regathered, as many such positions on eschatological futures were so developed prior to that occurring in the last century. One certainly cannot develop a complete theology on such speculation alone as assumption in basis of fact, in light of the regathering of Israel since 1917, as was determined in a day in 1948 (see IS. 11:11). God is sovereign, not the Illuminati, or the two well meaning theologians mentioned (and who even knows who the Illuminati is, if they still exist in any measure, and how credible they are as to having empowerment to conduct such plans, if so. Are components of the report on them as were presented here then presently largely of myth or fact: until actually coming to pass, if and when so?).
The relationship of issues and comments presented ABOUT THIS ARTICLE by commenters is what was addressed in my own involvement so far. I began 1) with an unanswered inquiry on forbearance vs. the reverse case of supposed truth about a Christian position as was advanced by an accusation of the article examined as its basis to which Dr. Brown responded. 2) I engaged a correspondent commenter on what was up with his own concerns, self reports, reported personal past, and ongoing interchange: based on a strong reaction and an apparent lack of permisison for approaching the article substance other than through his personal lens. An unveiling through interchange, as information evolved on criteria for assessment of what was stated, proved to be mostly an assumed subjectivity of emotional regard of the assessment of this article’s posting, as such. It was presented as to establishing a resulting stance Devin has made here on the article as Dr. B presented it to be.
Probed, it presented that this stance was deriving from a source of assumption which was internal in origin as such, stemming from his person, and feelings, as stated as so valued, and as proved insurmountable and unapproachable as to establishing a broader academic look at the facts which Dr. B had stated in summary for achieving a reasonable dialogue on his reponse to the article above. Yet a difficult childhood history and enmeshed personal unresolved issues were overshadowing a practical interchange by the stated strong statements of assessment ascribing the intentions of Dr. B. This did not play out as the content of his statements. It presented as self protection or the stuff of defenses over actually discussing Devin’s reaction and related presenting issues in the developing interpersonal dialogue. A take on Fatherhood, and God as characterized as evil and negative was asserted by Devin by a limited sample of Biblical evidence, as accompanied with a presentation of strong fear and an assumption of negative value at to looking into the Biblical idea of fatherhood. That the subject of fatherhood was a quagmire of personal trauma and trepidation for Devin was stated as erected in the way of going to examine this topic in Jesus’ statements on the topic. 3) I mentioned early on that anyone has choices they may make over such past occurrances and their personal impact. Devin mentioned trauma, displayed strong feelings of protection, and reported his history as so related. Dr. B. mentioned the need for healing, not confrontation on sexual choices.
It seemed to be a good time to breach other possibilities of what was keeping the mentioned areas of protection as forbidden topics from open discussion as to origins and responses going on in interchange with Devin.
In the rather complicated process of discovery and interchange, of the disclosed issues and strong reactions beginning to be disclosed and examined–which was not completed–4) the notion of centricity was conceptually introduced as to how that factors into the psychological concept of revealed sources of dialogue and self disclosure determining ones ‘locus of control’ in their self reporting. 4a) was Devin as Dr. B’s, and later my responder, responding or reacting here from truth given in the bases of the article here as was presented for comments, or so from other realities coming into the mix: realities like feelings, the presented facts, deep seated beliefs of reaction to his past, or one’s personal history, one’s strenght of likes and dislikes, pst formed self protections, and preferences–or, perhaps, some kind of mix of these? Such required dialogue to disclose such discovery. Academically listing what Dr. B. said was not permitted as possible. Feelings were the only meanings accepted, not the indicators of words themselves.
The notion of centricity as a location (locus) of control of choices, sometimes inarticulated and seated in a person as attitudes–as motivating actions for self protection and forbidden topic exploration/fixation–or the opposite presentation of self than self engaged on a topic–holds that where one centers one’s choices for responses to challenges around any topic, one’s frame of reference to being in interacting may be thus determined. If this reference for a self report is mostly in feelings or states of being involving a flood of overwhelming feelings, one can be stuck with an inner monologue of an inner life process which does not advance to full functioning, interactive trust, for healthy socialization, along with a complete recovery after past trauma.
If one erects a wall on seeing their own inward connections and self report threatened in some way, as involving a past history major disconnect: distrust asserts an understandable self protection, where one is ‘stuck’ from becoming fully functional, fully alive. One can be afraid of telling another who they are. One can be afraid and unaquainted with love. Life is depressing, numbing, and difficult accordingly. Jesus offers his own New and abundant Life, and this possiblity is interfered with by such a state of being. Faith too can seem to be a distant tower. Based on the truth of Jesus being who He stated He was, as alive, well, and unique in interactive potential and possiblity for personal development, how can such a soul become whole and fully alive?
Evidence built up from revealed self talk of an inner place for choices involving a centricity of a lack of academic objectivity for looking at other information when such topics were involved, and so by what was taken to task, and how it was stated. This presented in approaching and responding to the article here, and Dr. B’s generous time and compassionate efforts to see what Devin’s disagreement meant when it was presented as an absolute. Dialogue revealed a lack of accepting and surveying information he was given by a detached or academic approach to information, where, Dr. Brown went to the great effort of finding and printing a transcript of a detailed radio narrative for him, posting it, and offered continued dialogue. Frustration of a respectful interchange resulted.
A reasonable interchange was sabatouged by the respondent’s lack of reflective dialoguing.
4) It has been stated that early Romans is particularly sobering on this matter. And, part of the problem is hidden in plain sight. Idolatry which erects barriers to comprehending the ways of Christ can factor into deep seated choices for a disassociation with relationships which God foreordained as healthy relationships.
__________________________________
The NT is specific, as are some Prophets of Old, with the issues of who is the restrainer of evil as to an antiChrist son of hell asserting his role in the future governing the planet or part of it for a seven year season. It discloses a different perspective on why there would not be a ‘secret’ rapture, and so since it is about Jesus sudden visible “appearing” in the Greek, a catching up of believers to his appearing, and a visible glory in the process. It is good to know the promises srcipture makes about a believer’s future body, if dead or alive at the Return, and about a coming Kingdom of righteousness, peace, and integrity as based on the promises made especially to the descendants of David of a coming eternal throne for governance of a restoration of a creation settled eternal light. The Return fixes injustices of government, addresses personal difficulties of personal history and trauma, and rearranges the existing order of the world as we find it to be in these testy times. The Return is positive for those of faith in Jesus’ words and life, and the standards he has presented to humankind.
Let me be more specific about my generality:
There are tons of book, tapes, and movies about the final 7 yrs. before our Messiah’s return. But sometimes this turns into a Nt’l. Enquirer sensationalist tabloid repentance rather than a genuine inquiry. The world is famous for devouring its own, especially the somewhat-famous, as soon as there’s an opportunity. So whether pre-, mid-, or post-trib, the final years before the Second Coming are extremely short, and undue speculation has been focused upon it, partly because of spectacular content. But take away the Baalic sex and violence, and you have a very watered down vision indeed. The ongoing Arab uprising is much more real and graphic. Live bullets are being fired into crowds every day.
So let’s go back to the beginning of this blog:
Ahab/Jezebel hasn’t been answered, nor the forbearance of (I’m assuming): 1) clergy in sin; 2) laity in sin, as presented by the present Church structure. Would it help to have an OPEN FORUM that hardly anyone knew about? We want to engage leaders in a question/answer session, but that may not happen. Why?
NT Ahab = Nicolaitans (Rev. 2). OT Ahab = Tobiah (Neh. 13). Both are modern neo-Naziism, which the Republicans have been portrayed as, and sometimes lean toward, with the blessings of @ half the U.S. Church. Why shouldn’t this be addressed?
Look at the format: an article is presented (sermon). The small group discussion must stick to the sermon. These were the rules 20 years ago. But, this is not “our” flock.
Have I stirred the waters enough?
In Jesus’ love and name, Ron David Metcalf
‘Look at the format: an article is presented (sermon). The small group discussion must stick to the sermon. These were the rules 20 years ago. But, this is not “our” flock.’ RDM, Perhaps there is a comparison, but, too, it seems reasonable to want comments to stick to the topic raised. Talk of elephants as originally discussed, not of sow bugs is the gist.
Is the topic s as first expounded by an author of the VOR to be viewed as one way communication, inerrant, and not to be permitted in any measure to stimulate synthesis, or any associative spin offs? We must comment on how we feel and what we think about the article responded to, and Dr. B’s analysis of it. This, it seems, is to avoid the rabbit trails gone after (and finding the time to edit down what I most recently penned ad infinitum).
Devin had some reasonable complaints about my writing stream attempting to share counseling session client indication indicators and personality reporting trends noted during such processes. And too, Devin would not himself engage in reflective listening, paraphrasing, listing content, etc. when such crossed his own preferences as permitting a process of interchange coming to a postion of understanding and being understood. What was a writer was saying in response to others’ communication, such as Dr. B. What was heard was the sound of one.
Jabez,
Communication usually follows responding to the previous stream of thought. I studied poetry at a technological univ., so learned to scalpel my output, not unlike the father taught his boys in “A River Runs Through It”. With all the magnificent scenery in the movie, there was a deeper theme: a writer trying to come to grips with his brother’s death, not daring to think that his beloved could spend an eternity in hell. For all the hoopla of the Big Picture, the individual hurts and tragedies are what guides one’s philosophy and theology.
Freud and Darwin were admired for their meticulous scientific method, but I don’t see much empathy in either’s work. On the other hand, sympathy outside of God’s rules can lead to a false brotherhood. I have heard the sermon that “issues” prevent our healing. I have been told that I minister out of my hurt. But, if we belong to Jesus, we all are ministers, and we all have hurts. The clergy/laity double standard allows some to hide behind the pulpit to various degrees; but in the end, we all stand naked before God.
The world abhors this thought. How can a loving Father do away with all that He has created? Environmentalism seems like a good cause. Respecting the homosexual community seems like a good cause. But there are “issues”. My father’s best friend and my wife’s best friend became homosexual (not being born or raised that way), yet I can stand and say that some of the most perverse demons can be attached to this activity, and that Dr. Brown has made himself a bullseye for spiritual warfare attack. As for empathy, my grandfather’s death contributed to my own severe backsliding for two decades. But I had to come to a different conclusion than the protagonist in the movie: God is Judge, and even my dear granddad must stand before Him.
If there ever is a time to speak of NOW, it’s now. If our present President (God bless him) is reelected, it is not outside the realm of possibility, especially considering Revelation, that we could find ourselves in detention camps relearning why it is necessary to abandon Israel, using Stalag methods if necessary. But, is the Church prepard to vote for a Mormon? These are real “issues”. Why aren’t they being addressed; why do we continue to play our apologetics games? I don’t see why it is necessary to apologize about God to anyone; He has big shoulders, and the governments of the world will rest upon them. Enough for now.
In Him, Ron M.
RM,
Your mind and spirit and soul are in the mix of these perceptions, for sure. And a personal history with its definers of who you are becoming to be because of the ongoing parenting of God, our Father (‘which art in heaven, hallowed be thy name’). I think it is important to note the need for empathy to bridge the gap toward understanding and being understood. I also value the early Romans declarations of how idolatry comes into the mix of human deception and experience, and how the Father has limits of tolerance on such carrying into a magnifying eternity. Jesus not only offers New life and a New and Living Way, He offers to others His body on earth being the normal means of connection, the prayer closet being the personal means of reinforced adopted direction, and the respect of life and the essence of love itself being the CALL placed on all of mankind to become all mentione as positive and possible in the provisions of the New Covenant. I envy Michael Brown for having had the opportunity to deal with Jeremiah’s vision given of the New Covenant, with the mind of Christ, and Christ’s Spirit, meeting with his own mind through the study book writing experience. I would love to reverse the roles once a month on his radio program, and inquire of his own personal walk, and what stood out to him along the Way of such discovery.
This week, on the LOF program, the Zondervan study on the Jeremiah experience is available to all who linger here at a very attractive price. Recall that the New Covenant places God’s law and Way directly on the tablets of our hearts, with the illumination of the mind of the Messiah, recorded in the New Testament. I rejoice at this reality. As for the topic here: one can read Romans and get with God’s own heart, mind, and last days program.
RM, I had freshman English from the just retired President of U. Va., back in the 1960s. He had spent years interacting with the original manuscripts within the Robert Frost library housed at UVa (in becoming an English and Literature Prof.). His father was a USAEC Atomic submarine Atomic Energy engineer. Those fish are put in harbor near Va. Beach where my Mother then lived. Beieve it or not, poetry study and appreciation began with his direction here. You will find allusion to Randal Jarrell in some of the respondent material I sent URL addresses on. “Behind everything, something, etc.”.
What I do not comprehend is all the energy put into looking for political saviors in the US population, and the unclarified expectations involved of forming such loyalties, instead of looking to the Spirit within as to forming new alliances among the body of Christ in No. Am., (for the Bride to Make Herself Ready for the Return), with much anxious preoccupation among supposed believers as to who and what will lead this Nation, its unclear relationship with eschatology, and as to a new Generation’s cricital orientation to Jesus the Christ. It seems in this list that energy is being put into the first item on it more than the essential final item of it.
IT COULD NEVER HAPPEN HERE:
The U.S. handing over its heritage to foreign nations? It already has: the U.N. controls our nat’l. parks.
The bulwarks of capitalism, staunch conservative Republicans, bailing out banks to the tune of 3/4 of a trillion dollars? It already has.
The U;S Church, knowing the prophecies of Revelation, condemning Israel and supporting a Muslim takeover of Jerusalem? It already has, by several mainstream denominations.
THE HOLOCAUST: NEVER AGAIN.
You should know the cry and history of the rebirth of the Promised Land. You should know the Zeal of Zion.
For me, my heart for Yeshua Messiah is also a heart for Israel. Amen.
Shabbat Shalom, Ron David Metcalf
I am not as learned as those above me seem to be.. I only know that to change or twist you beliefs in the name of political correctness will not make God look on you with favor… sometimes too much education is not a good thing… Believe the bible the way it was written, not interpretations of obviously desparate people. and can you explain away Leviticus 20 vs.13.. it’s pretty plain….And just because modern culture accepts immoral behavior does not make it right…
Ron could you please explain what you mean by abandon Israel and using Stalag methods?
Jabez. I have had the Rapture discussion many times before to no avail. I have seen all the views and the arguments from scripture. You gave your views and the scriptures you believe support them. I would then turn around and discuss the coming in the clouds and later coming to Jerusalem as two separate events. In the first He comes for His bride, and in the second He comes back with His bride etc. I deliberately avoided scripture because the argument always ends with “You keep your belief and I’ll keep mine”.
I did assume the Pre-trib Rapture as that is my view. The explanations I gave are based solely on logic of strategy of war and fulfillment of end times events predicted in the end times prophesies. Recapping: It is my belief that Lucifer cannot be successful in putting in place his One World Government, Economy, and Religion unless we the Resistance are removed. The efforts of Christian Patriots are gaining much impetus as we spread the word of the Gospel and awaken the world to the New World Order. Our resistance through Tea Party and alternative news networks and radio programs like http://www.infowars.com and the Drudge Report etc. Should the resistance continue its present rate of growth it is very likely Lucifer’s plans fore world domination will fail.
However the prophesies say Lucifer does indeed succeed in his bid for world domination as it is part of God’s plan. If you see a strategy which will guarantee Lucifer’s success with approximately 2 billion Christians as resistors, I am open to hear them. Otherwise just consider this my personal opinion.
As to the topic of the article, I am in agreement with Dr Brown and I would offer one other point of interest. We are in a transition from the church of Philadelphia to the church of Laodicea. It is my belief that the church of Laodicea id the One World Religion the NWO is pressing towards and just as I believe Obama to be the Antichrist, I also believe Risk Warren to be the best candidate for the False Prophet who joins him. by his urging to church growth by appealing to the feelings on the unchurched, homosexuality invading the church should be expected.
Rollin,
Biblical prophecy is seated in the Book of the Land of the People of the Book, not in the USA. Didn’t dark forces succeed in bringing down twin towers, with smoke rising before the whole wide word, in spite of billions of Believer ongoing relationship with God in Christ? Who then is soverign: USA rapture futures, or the fact that the King can come both for and with saints at the same point in time?
Biblical prophecy is seated in the Book of the Land of the People of the Book, not in the USA. Didn’t dark forces succeed in bringing down twin towers, with smoke rising before the whole wide world, in spite of billions of Believers ongoing relationship with God in Christ? Who then is sovereign: USA believers rapture futures, or the fact that the King can come both for and with saints at the same point in time? Zech. holds the key.
answer: Russia’s use of mind-control techniques.
GOD is our first priority (Father, Son, Spirit Together, not pick-and-choose), but the Second Commandment is very similar to it.
In this, the Occupy Wall Street organizers are more correct than the Tea Party: we should focus on People (loving our neighbor) more than money (graven images). But many of them do not acknowledge the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.
It’s time to quit launching mortars from either side of the Straight and Narrow, and climb out of the New Age and Pharisee ditches and back onto the Highway of Holiness. We can be the 100% Absolutely Correct if we obey God and come to Unity of the Body. This applies no matter what country we live in.
In Him, Ron M.
So, I have been “de-moderated”. Why?
The original article is political. Comment #1 is political. Revelation certainly involves politics. Even Jabez’s Call for Council involves politics, as did his response to the Call Detroit.
You let me get this far, and now you cut off a comment concerning Unity of the Body?
Please explain.
In Him, Ron M.
A Voice of Reconciliation should not be met with resistance and opposition. This is a spiritual matter, and what I was warning against from the beginning of this blog.
“God is not willing that anyone should perish.” We did not cheer when S. Hussein and Gadhafi were killed, even though we were against their regimes. The anti-Wall Street organizers are nearly begging for dialog; they have no direction. This could be our finest hour, yet we are deeply divided. If God calls for Unity of the Body, what does Satan want?
The Second Commandment as Jesus tells us, loving our neighbor instead of making graven images (remember “Show me a coin”) is absolutely what we must get past (“crossing over”) to be able to launch an initiative (with Praise, Judah, as our weapon of warfare). Whewn we fight against each other, Satan laughs.
Again, we must get out of our New Age and Pharisee ditches, and get on the Highway of Holiness with our LORD. Until we do that, there is no Taking Back Our Land; only civil war and strife.
In Him, Ron M.
I have studied scriptures for the last three years, not ony for my own edification , but as a matter of comparison of the scriptures with history, focusing on the history of the globalists followers of Lucifer through their agencies such as the Freemasons, Theosophists, Illuminati, and many others including smaller branches like the CIA, MI6, Mossad, CFR, and the UN with its Agenda 21.
Ron as you mentioned above, Satan (or Lucifer as he is known to his followers) does indeed laugh when we fight amongst ourselves. Writers like Ross Murry are tools knowingly or not of Lucifer to divide the church and transform it into the church of Laodicea. They are having a great deal of success in getting churches to accept homosexuality and disposal of the five core beliefs of holiness oriented churches and seminaries. This is why the church has and continues in many instances dropped the ball on being wise as serpents and gentle as doves. For example one of the Rockefellers founded and funds 285 seminaries, so is it any wonder many pastors come from those seminaries ill equipped for the work of God.
For more than the last 100 years the church has had its head in the sand. Certainly we are in the world not of the world, but that is not an excuse for not knowing the world or taking the stewardship to keeping our country pure to its initial goals and truths.When followers of Lucifer, which practice homosexuality as has been documented at Bohemian Grove, are leaders and educators of our country, we should not be surprised at the results.
Homosexuality in the Emergent Church, the church of Laodicea is here to stay.
It seems divergent to now discuss someone’s personal inquiry of various sources on their understanding of end time believed cuturally seated subjects. Yes all is entwined, no, not all is about the trend Dr. B. is bringing to our attention. Daniel seats events regarding control of such a timeframed season as presenting among his people group.
The people group here, in the examination of this trend at hand, are those in conflict with early Romans over the matter of consciences being seared by idolatry, and God “permitting” depravity as a result. The trends Dr. B. is bringing to our attention is of the press giving completely false reports, antiBiblical, and antiChrist assertions by the secular press. The premise of these is based not on good news, but on permissive and seared conscience news.
RDM, the site is not always stable as to what it accepts and rejects; this is especially so on the LOF. Your reported experience may not be directly related to your summary conclusion on the matter, but I have no way of comprehending what you remark was either not posted, accepted, or is pending. Technical and moderator sensibilities seem in the mix of what happens, and, the total site was down completely early in the AM.
RDM, or perhaps you were saying something about my comment, #48? My e-mail server has been bouncing back many e-mails to many because of nearing its storage limit, perhaps that was what you were referring to? Didn’t I forward a second e-mail address as well? Not sure what you are referring to about being “cut off”. Please clarify.
I was answering Rollin’s question, as well as what I was able to get through later.
I received this on my e-mails: I see it did not appear, but thought it was a good comment:
There is a new comment on the post “A GAY ACTIVIST BUTCHERS THE BIBLE”.
http://www.voiceofrevolution.com/2011/11/02/a-gay-activist-butchers-the-bible/
Author: grandma lliberty
Comment:
I am not as learned as those above me seem to be.. I only know that to change or twist you beliefs in the name of political correctness will not make God look on you with favor… sometimes too much education is not a good thing… Believe the bible the way it was written, not interpretations of obviously desparate people. and can you explain away Leviticus 20 vs.13.. it’s pretty plain….And just because modern culture accepts immoral behavior does not make it right…
RDM,
I do see the grandma comment appearing above as #50, and yours on unity appearing above too. It takes time for moderation, and, or technical inclusion in this blog. Perhaps more patience is needed to inherit its promise of posting one’s comments? I am encouraged a bit by responders alike beginning to develop some respectful interchange of dialogue, instead of merely posting there imphatic positioning and posturing for such.
Unity in the body comes from loving as Jesus loved. He only became exasperated with his opponents when they started indicatint that good was evil, and went after the very Plan of Redemption the Father was extending to the chosen Nation through Him, its Messiah.
Pray for the upcoming lecture at the music school at Co. Christian U. of a former IDF special ops
sargent on “Ethics and the IDF”, sponsored by three Jewish led nonprofit organizations supporting Israel here in the Denver metro area (I am on the board of one). That the barriers of understanding and being
understood continue in our area to be removed regarding the living Word of the Bible and the Christian and Jewish communities of our area. G-d is doing something new among us and between us.
err, i.e….instead of merely posting their emphatic positioning and posturing as such.
There have been moderator problems since the beginning of this blog. But these are minor glitches compared to current events.
Jabez, I would be interested in knowing some of your groundrules concerning the Council, and how can this apply to an open forum? And how can people get recognition for what they do, as in a graduate program, compared to undergraduates who seem to be fair game for teachers stealing whatever anyone says (I use this as an analogy to clergy/laity). Sowing into others’ fields is not normally prudent. Sacrifice should apply to leaders as well as the “little people” they supposedly serve. Preaching selflessness after a 45-minute offering call never made much sense to me.
Shared blessing hasn’t materialized yet for either Jews nor Gentiles. Polarization deliberately keeps the focus upon contest instead of solution.
I may not respond after this for awhile. God established Marriage, then Family, then Tribe, and I need to concentrate on that the next week or so.
A Blessed Thanksgiving weekend to everyone.
In Jesus’ love and name, Ron David Metcalf
RCM,
What I think is unimportant, but the balanced vision for achieving a mutually responded Call is vital to overcoming the past lack of supposed leadership yielding to Christ in us. Christ in us. Christ in us being the Hope.
The Waters flow. Yeshua will return and his feet will touch the earth, the ancient trees, the stones of graves. Change yields at once, a rush of Spirit wind and water. The earth opens its once clinched palms to receive the flow of change from the Messiah. Touching where he met the flesh, His rest, and met with the Father.
Opposite Zion, once there stating its future losses, trials, and hope. A gaze over the Holy Mountain from the Holiest of Holies: the heart of the One. The Lord’s house shall be established higher than the mountains. It shall rise high above the hills, and the nations shall stream into it. The living rivers shall flow to heal and sparkle with joy.
Before joy happens terms of the Prophets of Old are rendered active among the nations, among the chosen, among those walking in ignorance, and those walking with Him as One. His communion is undisturbed in assembly, His grandeur shall reach the ends of the earth. From the One who is to be ruler in Israel, whose origin is from ancient of days. HE shall be peace.
Now we are challenged, knowing this future, to be like dew coming from the Lord forming like raindrops on grass, lingering drops on leaves, drops falling moving to the surface of land, and flowing into one river of life. These beginning waters of abiding tears and new life do drop in humility to mingle as one, though found all over the earth. They flow to oceans, seas, and find the rivers to go there.
The need for Council is simply the need to agree, wherever the Lord has placed us, to gather for petition (now that the first 2011 call has passed in opportunity) as one, in the fall of 2012, wherever we bend our knees: in homes, in assemblies, at meals, in fasting and lamenting, in rejoicing and thankfulness, from the Day of Atonement 2012 forward for touchpoints of prayer, fasting, consecration, forgiveness, and request: that God agains confirm and visit His People. Renew our nations, Lord. Renew our hearts, Lord. Visit us once more, prepare and consecrate, lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil. Confrim your Kingdom among your People. Let New life gather the waters, draw them together as one flowing river, one waiting sea, one voice of supplication, prayer, and Praise. May this yielding motion carry from fall into January. May we send our agreement, each name, household, and assembly to one list of agreement, over this tool of communication. May this be compiled, taken to the place outside the camp where our Atonement was achieved, and offered there in agreement with the Father to complete His Plan of Redemption and hear His People, heal their land, restore their vision, unify their hearts.
Moses was emphatic that we were not to inquire into how the pagans worshiped “their gods” and not to apply their principles to our faith (Deut 12:29-32). Does this then say that one can be following a wrong objective in seeking to comprehend various groups with published and unpublished intentions regarding the present situation of truth twisting which Dr. B. examines, or the details of conspiracy hunting on the Return of Christ others suggest here? Why and why not?
It does not take a spiritual Rapture scientist to discern the times, and our need to establish a Union Life Christ declared response to them as His People. Christ is on the throne. We are seated with Him not for for meeting based spiritual indulgences, or apologetics opportunities to publish here, but to bring His reign through His Kingdom, to earth; HE is in US. First, yielding to His foundational establishments is required of us (to what Paul called “my gospel”, as Jesus conveyed it to him to be placed among the nations), nex,t declaring a universal Church Council for conformity to these standards of His New Covenant, third, raising a common purpose, intention, and resulting expression based on a declared season of supplication, repentance, yielding to the leadership of His Spirit (as alike did the Priests of Nehemiah’s restoration period, and so, as prophecied, looking to a future Messianic Glory). Sleeping, burdened with dissipations, cares, riches and relativism the Church did not even grant credence to the Call to His People in 2011. After Christmas, after the world turns its back on the ensign of the times by raising up other plans for His Land of the People of the Book, increasingly into fall 2012: the need to agree to Call a Council to prayer and repentance from the Day of Atonement into January 2013 will present to be the far more logical and reasonable choice for His People than placing hope in the USA’s media based political process.
The call to Council then grants opportunity–among the whole people of God, as beginning of His own of No. Am.–for the Spirit of Christ to revisit, affirm the foundations, and reestablish, and do a new work.
Though there has been a lull in his creation for the appreciation of his saints Thankfulness, He will
very soon again shake creation regarding the present defiance of The Prophets of Old standards, as Jesus confirmed these to hold, which reveal many realities: all to be summed up in Christ. Even the present rebellion against the rule of God in Christ, moving to ignore morality as the basis of real liberty, and His purposed Call to bring His teaching to this wide world, is held in contempt by the direction the nations have chosen, re: 1) Christ’s standards, 2) what constitutes actual freedom, which He bled and died for, and 3) the pillar of fire and devotion to be cultivated in each household, in each heart and mind, and assembly conducted in His Name. The Spirit will declare and Name who are +His as a result of yielding to this purpose, His Call, our sanctification for His service. Let it be so.
Psalm 2
1 Why do the nations conspire[a]
and the peoples plot in vain?
2 The kings of the earth rise up
and the rulers band together
against the LORD and against his anointed, saying,
3 “Let us break their chains
and throw off their shackles.”
4 The One enthroned in heaven laughs;
the Lord scoffs at them.
5 He rebukes them in his anger
and terrifies them in his wrath, saying,
6 “I have installed my king
on Zion, my holy mountain.”
7 I will proclaim the LORD’s decree:
He said to me, “You are my son;
today I have become your father.
8 Ask me,
and I will make the nations your inheritance,
the ends of the earth your possession.
9 You will break them with a rod of iron[b];
you will dash them to pieces like pottery.”
10 Therefore, you kings, be wise;
be warned, you rulers of the earth.
11 Serve the LORD with fear
and celebrate his rule with trembling.
12 Kiss his son, or he will be angry
and your way will lead to your destruction,
for his wrath can flare up in a moment.
Blessed are all who take refuge in him.
Footnotes:a.Psalm 2:1 Hebrew; Septuagint rage
b.Psalm 2:9 Or will rule them with an iron scepter (see Septuagint and Syriac)
<<
>>
Been busy with family the last few days.
“A universal Church Council for conformity”? It has taken nearly 2000 years to get to where we are, and look at all the division. Jesus was not a Gnostic; though His Kingdom was not of the earth, certainly there were all sorts of practical applications put into place; some that we have not yet even begun to talk about.
Paul’s Council in getting the Jerusalem Church to agree not to put the burden of the Law upon new Gentile converts has had far-reaching implications; the debate still continues ferociously between Grace and Judgment; this can go “overboard” into the parallel “ditches” I mentioned earlier.
I prefer to bathe in the Holy Spirit and not consider Administration at all; but anytime I go to a fellowship or gathering in the LORD this inevitably comes up; whether in asking for volunteers, tithes and offerings, or even in asking for (usually) complete agreement in what is being presented. VOR at least gives a semblance of the synagogue model: discussion for discernment rather than “my way or the highway”.
HE in US includes our principality: the U.S. What is currently being presented is that a dictator banker is better than Congress; this is dangerous. The One World Gov’t. is coming soon enough; I will fight against it while I can.
In Him, Ron M.
I think honoring a Call to a mutual seasion of Prayer becoming observed at least Continent wide among believers being a cause for Council divides no one. It uplifts a unique opportunity to act as One, though does not usurp continuing with one’s commitments, and observances found in one’s particular established channels of religion. Considered being of a related confession of faith in Him being of an agreement of a direct faith in Jesus Christ does not raise any religiously or doctrinally objectionable loyalty criteria for anyone. by such a Call no one is proposed to arise to a leadership lordship over anyone else by following such a proposal. The Asbury historical renewal.revival model of 1970 says it is achievable, and, if by Council, on a much larger scale. It really depends on God’s own faithfulness for a response to such a petition season.
I frankly do not equate the US economic or political scene with the body of Christ and its prayer potential. In the present day mystery disposition of the Kingdom of God in Christ, great possiblities exist for establishing a wide solicitation of the Spirit of Unity in Christ. Why resist an opportunity to request that God Himself make changes in hearts and minds? We will not require analysis for such a prayerful regard. Simply accurate reporting of its occurrance, and perhaps awe of its results.
Even though the Call Nashville (7-7-7) had certain denominational or movement influence and some political affiliation, it was largely an idealistic launching, and achieved almost its 70,000 attendee goal, though not backed by local church groups as much as hoped. But by the Call DC in ’08, some of the old Moral Majority loyalty had returned as the only viable option. It has been the Republican onslaught against abortion that has turned the tide; but the price has been further polarization, and perhaps also a perpetual repentance stance that has turned away from the blessings of Love, Joy, and Peace; so there has been no Rejoicing in what has been accomplished. This is recent history to point out some of the problems in simply calling for National Prayer. What can be done differently? I would say that PRAISE (Hebrew: Judah) also prophetically must be included. I say that GOD provides the fires of repentance when we worship Him in Spirit and Truth: this, then, becomes ministering to an audience of One, instead of one (ourselves only).
In Him, Ron M.
Well, again,
look at the You Tube 30+
minute Asbury Revivial
report of 1970 to discover differences.
1) Assembly by the structure which already exists, not some new structure. 2) Wherever one prayes already, at home, at church, wherever. 3) by self starting and following a mutual schedule by calendar’s movement, not an organization’s agenda, per se. As with any Call, the need has to present to as many as call upon his Name due to discerning the need. 2012 into 2013 should sufficiently challenge believers and nonbelievers alike. Leaving one’s political heart at the altar of personal prayer over a three month drop in drop out season should be different that looking here and there for the sound of truth ringing in inner agreement to predisposed loyalties. Our loyalities are what decide who we are and will be in Christ, and where those prove petty, the heart of the individual can present directly to God and His Spirit alone for change. Thus whip em up and pump em up is totally outside the boundaries and possiblilities of this CALL. One has to primraily look inward and wait for God to act, not outward for actions to occur. This is quite different than external religious experience and exercise seeking.
I already addressed some of this in past postings, e.g. under the Generation Revival writing by Andrew Yoeman, the now hard to find minsitry man mistaken omniscent narrator video declarations
of David Popovici, and in responses to past Benny Hinn admirations declared by VOR writers as a supposed ministry example. All, except those of Yoeman are external stimulant orientations to religious experience, not a true CALL to the inner man. Consider how Jesus called his disciples to follow him, addressed them by Name, and immediately included them as forming an inner circle. Consider how hard it is in the USA to even begin to extend such personal regard of trust, where trust is extended, in addition to being earned. In the USA’s religions we have erected all these performance and stimulus response perks for the assembled. Let’s get back to the basic 1:1 prayer closet relationship, now that is different. Externals and observables are out of sight, out of mind. One’s heart is placed directly in petition before the Father. That is how Jesus prayed, in places apart, not placements highlighted by spotlights.
Who was blessed by Jesus’ ministry: the masses, or the Pharisees? Fast-forward to the present: as long as ministry honestly focuses upon worshiping GOD and asks for His Glory, all goes well; the second we take our eyes off Him and begin counting the money, looking for publicity, etc., there is trouble.
The closest I know to what you are endorsing (trying to understand) was what was called the Lighthouse Movement (take-your-neighborhood prayer strategies) begun by Ed Silvoso which various groups endorsed at one time or another. This also failed, and I’m not really sure why. In answer to prayer, GOD may start a movement; then leaders end it, not having control over it. I could give several examples over the last two decades of this happening, but manifestations of GOD’s Glory are controversial; and this takes us back to the original article: being Changed from Glory to Glory. All genuine “waves” have the same origin: GOD. Their endings vary, but nearly all involve man trying to impose his will over GOD’s will. GOD is not mocked indefinitely: but the lack of unity requires me to ask you for more specific strategies of how to sustain the “morning and evening offerings”. I agree that the successes and failures of individuals should not matter so much with the New Wineskin, if I am reading you correctly.
In Him, Ron M.
RDM,
It is difficult to discern if we are in agreement or disagreement, for, you seem to be developing your own analysis as centered in your own intellect about (italicized, about) this movement or that one. You seem to be highlighting all the reasons why whatever did not finish its race or goals, and how typical that may be of the limits of human involvement and occupation. And I disagree completely about which example seems to indicate setting a course as I have advocated a CALL to prayer to so pursue.
As written here, and in the VOR, dozens of times, we have the more perfect way model, as did in fact accomplish its goal, by solicitation and directly wairing on God to do the work: inside the soul’s of the population involved. Their council set a prayer solicitation plan performed by the few, that affected the many.
It simply has been stated here over and over and over on the VOR, where it has become apparent that many folks writing various articles of analysis about states of Christian being, are not solution focused, but analysis focused–which is the way that education or journalism has set its own agendas for years.
The Asbury Model of 1970 did in fact accomplish all I describe and propose, and much much more. If it can work His Way among a diverse population of 1200 or so–staff, students, and faculty alike–creating mutual confession, mutual humility, and mutual submission to the visiting Spirit of God in that instance (without planning beyond the initial petition coucil plan of prayer): such a pursuit can work among a larger professing population. This event and events on the West Coast spiraled into the Jesus movement of 1971-72, that redeemed a generation. The greatest miracle was not just this Asbury population humbling itself before God and one another, regardless of position, it was that the Coucil to pray as One invited Christ to visit and He did.
You have not discussed this event as a causal model at all, and I doubt have viewed the You Tube documented testimonies of that small town visitation, which magnified to shake the No. Am.
Continent. It seems like a propensity to analysis is in the heart more than yielding to Christ Himself in humility to do and accomplish His Redemptive interactions, which result from humble petition in unity. The model is precise, it worked, and its fruit is well known. E. Stanley Jones too was a student at the time, and gave an alike testimony of the affect and effect of the solicited and requested visitation. Jesus came to the Campus by the Spirit of Christ, and the direct report is not the stuff of analysis/paralysis.
E. Stanley wrote a book on his deathbed, which only his closely related daughter present could comprehend to scribe for the faithful’s comtemplation. It is called the Divine Yes. We cannot live the life of the Truth and New and Living Way by analysis, nor by negation, but by the literal affirmation of Christ in Us. This focus differs radically from the political analysis so far advanced here by some commenters as being somehow insightful of what is needed, when such misses the mark of the City of God, and the Kingdom’s more excellent pursuits as a sole focus for exhertion of speech, steps, talk, walk, and devotion. It is a matter of simplifying to the basics of faith, hope, and love to get on with the business of the Redemptive intentions of God in Christ for this Continent, its present generation, and heart. Political consequences will happen as a result of pursuing the heart of God, in humility, not as a result of the nay of Political analysis. The Divine Yes is a matter of letting the dross fall away, and honing in on the pure heart of God, seated in Christ, modeled by his interactions on earth, and in heaven.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7qOqitIKUNs&feature=fvsr
Jabez,
Yes, you have filled the VOR blogs with your vision; and I am one of the first to ask you for further info.
My wife and I were part of the Toronto Blessing in New England @ a year after its first beginnings (that started in prayer); then moved to Fla. and at least experienced some of the Brownsville Revival where Dr. Brown gained his reputation (without discussing all the implications of that now); and were part of the four-month Fla. Outpouring from the second day; I also went to Israel for the Call Jerusalem @ the same time. All these “movements” were God-breathed though more structured than the Asbury model once they began; I would say emphatically that they have affected this generation as much as the Jesus movement did the youth generation of the 70′s; as did the 50′s movement did for Bob Jones and Paul Cain, who have been mentioned in other postings. The point is, there are many similar models historically that we may draw upon; all have influenced their participants dramatically.
I am all for you standing on your mountain from Boulder, Co. and declaring a Call to Council; to me personally, that is saying, “Come now, and let us reason together,” says the LORD. But Council generally implies leadership, unless it is specifically designated an Open Forum. Recall that Paul had to go to Jerusalem to seal his own endorsement from the First Church, before he branched out on his own. I prefer the All Priests and Kings to the Clergy/Laity model, but this can become “all chiefs and no indians”. There must be protocol, as Paul quickly found out.
What is GOD trying to accomplish? What are similarities and differences in the Tabernacle of David (Amos 9:11) compared to the House of Prayer to all nations? I have discussed this with others. This is a quick outline of what I “see”:
1) The Third Temple must be rebuilt. All who contribute to this with a pure heart will be blessed; though the antichrist will declare himself god there before Messiah returns. Leaders such as Dr. Brown can help sort out the wheat and tares, though all will grow together.
2) We must pray for a true Great Awakening as prophesied in latter Joel 2. No one leader or group of leaders can patent or franchise this; the “nameless, faceless generation” will accomplish it. There are ongoing discussions of how GOD will do this; and is probably what you ask is contention? The old wineskin will burst; this travailing has already extended past any timelines I calculated.
3) Prophetically, Nebuchadnezzar’s rule must end, and the time of the Medes begun, so that Cyrus (Hebrew Koresh) may emerge from the King and Esther (instead of Ahab/ Jezebel). All insinuations that Republican Presidents sit at the right hand of the Father must be abolished. There has been great resistance to me declaring any of this. Do you know who your friends are?
In Him, Ron M.
RDM,
Interesting list.
Continuing with an alike style of past assertions made, by employing a cryptic interpretative summary for the faithful, by using Biblical words within its final listed number, may seem to be authoritatively declarative and emphatic, but it simply is not the case. Why? Forming such a remark with the Biblical language and forms of the places and kingdoms of interpretation of the statue of Daniel seems profound, but as given is quite the opposite. Daniel is not set against a revival meetings attendance background mentioned in the comment as framed to assert such a leap of interpretation of Daniel’s words as are given. These words do not then become a present case present placement, or enigma, as is placed in the face of your readers. By listing stated revival meetings attended as becoming personal validity references for statements later made–implying too a USA political scene connection for the Biblical allusions of Daniel–meaning, truth, and Jesus plans of redemption become highly unclear by these remarks. Such a list can add to the confusion of the signs of the times we deal with as being part of God’s people who are not of Daniel’s own people of reference in the context given in his book (unless one is Jewish, and living in the Land of the People of the Book, which is what Daniel discusses). Our sanctification process is not the stuff of Daniel’s book, simply put.
It is clear in going to Daniel for a read on the statue symbol and interpretation of it given there in his text, that your #3 is not Biblically based on that book’s sent Angel’s revelation statements found there, given as heaven sent interpretations directly revealed to Daniel (in his thousands of years old outstanding text, as such). This is obvious when reading the passages which use your references to Nebuchadnezzar, the Medes and Persians, etc.: as to what these references then are, in relationship to what has been fulfilled in literal, Jewish, and surrounding nations history from Daniel’s text. His book continues the vision of the statue into redemptive and sifting seasons by what is stated as remains to be fulfilled there.
His text is clearly not written as an analogy for the Church of Christ’s own preoccupations. It thererfore becomes highly problematic to replace Daniel’s references with USA and other revival references, with Christian community response references, or with USA political references (as you seem to have done). This holds as to moving by your list’s contents and prior paragraphs, one by one, to an implied location for your personal interpretation of differnce from scripture about where the Daniel declared statue’s vision of Gentile Kingdom rule history completions have past completed, now exist, and are set to complete from their middle eastern centered Biblical locale in the future. Daniel’s book has many themes, and a primary theme, and it is not about the Church or US politics and/or any Call to the faithful regarding recent US or Israel revival meetings.
The Kingdoms involved in Daniel’s vision fulfillments, as are mixed with other subjects by your final #3 remarks, seem to plant themselves in replacement theology: as to who are represented to be God’s people of reference in Daniel. These references ultimately become a replacement center of conscience, outlook, religious activity, and consequence by enmeshing these with USA political references in your statements. It must help to make these remarks seem spiritual in outlook to make such statements in such cloaked language, and emphatically so in order to get around the hermenutical interpretation challenges such a loose association avoids altogether.
Even Dr. Brown has recently stated on the LOF there is no basis for the “church ages” interpretation of the Revelation words of warnings and affirmations written to seven churches in Asia (in Turkey) becoming by a leap of noncontextually text based interpretation representing seven ages of the church on earth. And, even if one accepts such a framework placed on the Age of the Gentiles time of world dominance and confusion, the Daniel reference does not apply as you have represented it to be. Finding all scripture as allegory for Christian communities application is inherently problematic and confusing as to what believers understand, must comprehend, and do to trim their lamps and prepare for the Return, as beoming the Bride of Christ.
________________________________________________________
At no time has the No. American CALL proposal of reference, for a season of prayer and consecration, been replicated in past church history, for at no time has history presented the present challenges to the church, as well as offered present means for its coordinated communication facilitation. There has not occurred a three month Call, as established by a Council Agreement, for such a season for petition, by No. American Continent-wide believers. What is different then from your first paragraphs references is for His People to act locally, while gathered as One Continent-wide: by an agreed by Council schedule co-association for prayer. This, combined with faith in Jesus capabilities for engaging change on the earth, stemming from requests made from our own devotionally established locales for prayer, for the purpose of a Continent-wide consecration season: responds in faith to the presenting moral and spiritual climate still affecting the upcoming Generation in our Nations (as well as those of past faith).
This Call is made to be established by a simple affirmation of a Co-Council of Agreement Plan’s schedule for a considered prayer and supplication, as pursued simultaneously, mutually, and devotionally. A list of persons and fellowships as affirmation of doing so is to be placed at the place in Israel as acknowledged of the historic Atonement of the Messiah. The expectation involved moves to the ends of the Chronicles promises given God’s people made by Him, for those who call themselves by His Name and obey the scripture’s request to repent. The expectation is change for our land. This consequence happened of the early 1970s revival, and is not yet indicated as to establishing spiritual climate change by reports at large on the Continent. This Call, in effect, moves to petition Christ for His border to border renewal as ONE People of faith.
True travail, with leaders and followers alike yielding selves to a petition for a mutual consecration–by confession of sin and acknowledgement of need–yields the Call to petition the Father on His own terms. The purpose of a Call for a No. American body of the faith for a mutually declared repentant obedience, confession, prayer, and renewal is to address the signs of the times and present rebellion challenges involved. The Call then to His People is in proportion to the presenting problem of No. America (and the whole wide world): regarding the claims and heart of Christ, His own government, His Commission, and spiritual warfare with the drift of all contients away from Christ.
The presenting situation is that literal law of Gentile authority of the present Age has been constructed by Gentile governments in direct rebellion to the word of Christ holding over our nations (laws recently established for obedience which are contrary to God’s own long standing standards are in effect, when God’s word requires contrary standards. We will bow our knees together before the Lord of the Kingdom of God in Christ). This spiritual climate indeed sets the stage for the final events of the end of the Age. Looking to the Prophets fulfillments then becomes important for His People’s understanding, and as to making petitions of understanding (Acts 3:21).
As written, Rollin’s analysis too past gave greater creedence to who might be the restrainer of evil, than is warranted by looking at the 9-11 event as indeed an indicator of evil’s assertion advancing against the Kingdom in this Continent and Nation. What is required of a Call’s actual petitions of spiritual warfare to unify God’s People for His considered service, beyond present indicators of some indifference toward obedience and empowerment to be His witnesses?
It seems your own history as a revival meeting seeker geographically has been to go to and fro looking and looking to what occurs in these gatherings for change, as you cited. Again, your response above seems journalistic, and contains all the constructed communication processing elements of continuing analysis as being your primarily indicated meaning of personal interest (which reasserts your own position to do so as such being of essentialpurpose as to interpreting what happened with your presence in these various places). A reporter’s emphatic statement about attended meetings is the primary proof offered of stated as supposed results. However, how deep and wide these results are differs indeed from what occurred from the Jesus Movement of the 1970s, according to the widespread evidence of what occurred and changed. Other empiracle proof is not offered for your emphatic statement, as such, beyond a Reporter one’s self validation of interpretation. Did you live as an adult believer in the 1970′s, and so can compare and interpret? Have you considered the evidence stemming from that faith movement of rebirth of a generation?
This kind of emphatic interpretation of your own observation of point placement revival meetings seems to be repeating what we find on TV News on most any subject of fleeting public interest. Notice that on TV the reporting goes to and fro looking and looking, then summarizes by emphatic analysis what is implied alone as a model for finding any phenonenas’ meaning. Meaning in the Call I shared is about connection to the Father based on John 17 , the Chroncilces famous passage promises, and many other alike teachings of Jesus and the Apostles. It is based too on the indicators of meaning and change, not analysis, of the Asbury revival (where God himself, not leaders by cues, led the repentant change to all hearts involved).
It is quite another matter to yield to a common cause by a common body of a Call’s faith Council. If you review the final few minutes of the Asbury video, URL posted, the Council was agreed for action among students, 6 groups of 6, in dorms, and petitioned the Lord for his reaffirmation and visitation. The Lord responded by word of knowledge, and acted as He stated He would (all classes then were cancelled for the week of the Spirit’s visitation among the whole school population). Part of the agreement was for participants to obey the Father daily in the big and little requirements of practicing their faithin their daily lives. This then involved two aspects of the seven fold spirit of Christ (found in Isaiah, and in the Revelation). In the past, most Pentecostal petitions have been for ‘power’, based on on cue meeting demand behaviors. Yet this pattern is not in the waiting as One body instructions for petition for prayer as are related throughout the New Testament. Going there and gleaning from Paul’s, Jesus’ and other prayers too, one can find how to pray to affect awakening and presence of Christ visitation: by the Father doing the work in his own, not by the preaching of suggestion and on cue command (is that what you mean by leadership? Certainly that was active of the revival meetings you listed attending.).
You have misundersteed the proposal, if you believe it is “my” ["your"] vision. Comprehension is reflected in understanding that the Asbury model was about the common denominator of practicing an active repentant faith petition by schedule for a renewal revival within an existing local community which recognized the common thread basis for the Father’s heart response by giving first place to Christ in them.
Ron and Jabez,
I extend to both of you my deepest appreciation for your zeal and desire to see reformation and renewal and revival in a true and sustainable manner. I would simply urge you to carry on this detailed exchange (which I have not been able to follow in any depth) in another forum more conducive, lest we totally stray from the clear guidelines we post here in which we request everyone posting to stay within the confines of the subject matter. Otherwise, the threads lose their integrity and flow.
Thanks so much!
Dr. Brown,
With all due respect, do you know anywhere else in U.S. Christiandom we can discuss this freely? As this has been my only blog on VOR, I would like to know where we could have reached such heights and depths elsewhere. Leadership ordination has produced like-mindedness for centuries; a Call For Council or New Wineskin challenges many Established Traditions; the latter has allowed secular sympathy to challenge GOD from a heretic humanism against a supposed angry Creator.
In Jesus’ love and name, Ron David Metcalf
M.B.
If you had had the time to read the interchange, the relevancy would be certain. 1) you revealed error in the assumptions made of Christianity in reference to Gays by the comments of your article, 2) people responded more globally as to desiring a solutions focus than locally as to addressing actual literal article content, although that occurred as well, 3) Unfortunately, that response created other conditions and communications of error as well, which required some address.
Please consider the necessity of a Solutions Focus center as to all that is raised and discussed on the VOR. As you have past indicated, it is better to increase the light than curse the darkness. This is occurring by the stimulus response of the VOR responsive population. It remains problematic that only in very selective instances do actual writers and posters of articles of the VOR respond directly to commenters of these articles. Also, achieving actual dialogue is limited and limiting by the inconsistencies of responses of the writers for the VOR. It starts to be, after precedence of not responding, a venue for analysis rather than a means to stimulate a Solution focus for the particular problems and themes raised.
It may seem tangental, but, the nuancesof particulars stimulated and synthesized as a result of the original article in question, results in an actual address of underlying forces and principles involved as affecting the cultural conditions of the original article posting. What was occurring above is indeed an interchange of a solutions focus regarding the problem of obsfucation, moral failure, sexual confusion, and spritual need which the posting of this article raised. If you want a Jesus revolution–as you have stated desired–then permitting room for it to happen through invested believers responding to your postings may be in the formula. Otherwise, what is the point of posting endless articles on the various topics of catagory here? If we want more information we can search and find it in the world’s biggest information library, the internet. If we want the Divine Yes of actual change, in concert with the Spirit of Christ, then these catagories in themselves, and articles endless postings in themselves, must yield to pursuit and advancement of the Kingdom of God in Christ as a solution to the cultural problems raised.
And, as this seems to be a core issue of this being your gig, if you wish me to stop participating here, I will honor that request.
Gentlemen, I’m sure there are other threads either here on VOR or on the LOF website where this discussion is quite directly relevant. By all means, continue the important and valuable interaction there. Do a little searching and you’ll doubtless find the right thread — and then have at it! This is all worthy.
1 Cor. 13:12,13: For now we see through a glass, darkly; but then face to face; now I know in part; but then I shall know even as also I am known. And now abideth faith, hope, charity, these three; but the greatest of these is .
This is the original topic discussion Scripture reference. Where there should be unity, there is great division.
“A list of persons and fellowships as affirmation of doing so is to be placed at the place in Israel as acknowledged of the historic Atonement of the Messiah.” Church of the Holy Sepulcher, or the Garden Tomb?
“It is quite another matter to yield to a common cause by a common body of a Call’s faith Council.” The “interfaith council” I know of is notoriously apostate rather than apostolic. But you can’t ignore all sin in one group (yours) and give no grace to another’s. Repentance begins at home. I’ve had religious posturing up to my ears. My conversion predates the seventies, for the record. But my Baptism in the Spirit did not come until 1989. I also now yield the floor on this subject. Thanks for letting me participate.
In Him, Ron M.
Interfaith? Perhaps, but yielding to the practical purusit, certainly. The article raises a need to reassert the standards of God in Christ, and the situation in our society declares a need for the direct intervention of the Spirit of God on our Continent. (RDM), you have my address.
Part of all of this may be that God may is sifting the wheat from the tares through the fires of purification.
It seems 2 me that God has drawn a pretty clear line in the sand where no doubt everyone will have to come down on one side or the other. This is the new front of spiritual warfare perhaps even part of “the great delusion” that Paul spoke about.
Evolution & homosexuality as creations of God are the greatest delusions yet.
2ND THESSALONIANS 2
11 And for this reason God will send them strong delusion, that they should believe the lie,
12 that they all may be condemned who did not believe the truth but had pleasure in unrighteousness.
C. It is so. –JH