Faith... and Trust: The Same Things?

by AGuest 452 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

PSacramento

Wow...
Happy Thanksgiving to my American friends :)
myelaine

dear New Chapter...
thank you for the complementary things that you've said, and thank you for understanding, quite clearly, my pov.
dear Tammy...
I have said that I believe that AGuest loves an entity and hears a voice that she calls her lord...I think that she is being deceived by a demon and she disseminates the teaching that that entity gives her.
I have said that I think that you are being deceived by that same demon, whether directly or through AGuest I don't know...but I don't think that you "follow" it and I've never said that. In fact, I've mentioned more than once that I think that you follow or display your own values and characteristics which are kind and nice...they appear to us all to be Christ-like.
But this is why I think you are being deceived. scripture states that when you are in Christ you are crucified with Him and it is no longer you that lives but Christ lives in you(gal 2:20)...and that God works to reveal His Son in you(gal 1:16)...and that you have put on Christ (gal 3:27)...and that Christ is being formed in you (gal 4:19) scripture also states that there is one Spirit of Christ and if that same Spirit that raised Jesus from the dead dwells in you...you are His. (romans 8:9,11). You have been deceived into believeing that AGuest has that Spirit of Christ without God having displayed any of His power in making her over to be of or reveal the same Spirit AS Christ. She admits that she is not like Christ but that she tries..."oh, how she tries but,..." she says. The truth is this...Jesus says, "If you abide in Me, I will abide in you." (1 corinthians 12:13)
You have testified that you are in union with the same "christ" that AGuest is in union with...and that is where you are deceived. That "spirit" is not the Spirit of Christ...your own character and values are closer to the Spirit of Christ...but, for some reason which is only known to you, you have allowed yourself to be blinded and you favor the "spirit" or entity that AGuest witnesses to.
dear AGuest...
I trust that other people that have checked out your site are reporting the truth of what they have seen...I didn't need to go there myself to comment on things they have posted here. I can also surmise who some of the people are who are over there waiting on your "word"...they did the same thing here.
dear OUTLAW...
I wasn't including you with those I am concerned about...I was speaking about those who are lapping up that which is falsely called knowledge...those who are making spiritual alliances, conflicting "spirits" joining house to house, so to speak, under the pretense of being of the same spirit as Christ. This is what worries and concerns me...a diplomatic agenda to gather people together under a false christ...to receive the mark of the beast.
I am not purposefully attempting to be critical of AGuest...I want to warn her as much as anyone else. It is the "spirit" that she witnesses to, that has aligned itself with her that I seek to expose as a false christ.
love michelle
Qcmbr

I wanted to follow on PSacs ideas from a while back regarding the unknowable god.
If god is not detectable by virtue of his nature but can choose to modify / cloak / inhabit matter in such a way that he or his effects are detectable ( for example visions or walking on water ) then we can only suggest that people do not know about him because he chooses to remain undetectable. I do not have any truck with the illogical idea that we ( mere 100kg bags of animated star dust ) must look high and low for an unknowable being before he will decide the point at which he becomes perceivable, no that is rank stupidity, like expecting ants to have an appropriate attitude to us before we help them; the onus is completely on the father / teacher / master / creator / revealer figure to initiate the contact in an unmistakeable way.
Many people claim to have this revelation. They claim that the unknowable god has made himself knowable. The problem is that their subjective experiences with the divine are so different and utterly contradictory to everyone else's experiences and reveal so little regarding the real world ( its almost always useless info on how heaven works, how someone should worship or how a human chemical emotion such as love is an attribute of supernatural forces) that it is indistinguishable from and of as much use as a fairytale or a dream. The way to understanding claim those with the subjective experience is to put aside critical thinking and , as a child, believe and have faith while waiting for the arbitrary nature of the unknowable god to reach some tipping point and for revelations to occur.
The moment that information begins to flow between the unknowable and the material then often no further explanation is required / sought as to the source of this information, it must be the unknowable god! That the information is neither useful ( what does one do with a vision of a god on a throne?) or distinguishable from artistic imagination ( I saw a valley dry bones speaking ) and contains no information not already available to the subject experiencing the revelation ( no revelation ever reveals new laws of physics, new mathematical proofs, cures for illnesses etc.) is telling.
We have several well defined and well studied paths for how perception works and how it is a 'play' presented to our conscious mind normally after the subconscious decision has been reached and how that play can be altered to meet expectations ( we see things that aren't there, we continue to see illusions even when we have enough facts to explain them, we imagine the speed of events changing and so forth - examples on demand!) We know that a mendacious person can construct fantastical stories, authors can write fully realised worlds, mentally ill or abnormal brains can construct alternate untrue perceptions, emotion , lack of information , lack of processing time or actual brain wiring ( learnt mental filters) can produce imaginary experiences as the brain struggles to keep the 'play' going at all costs. This brain ability , perception constructed on the fly from imprecise inputs filled in with previous experience and expectation, is undoubtedly responsible for dreams, waking imagination and revelations ( unless we wish to ascribe all revelations, no matter how contradictory,how unique, how culturally apt , how immoral or fanciful as of equal weight and as manifestations by the unknowable god). In the light of this common human trait ( I'm switching to a more personal mode to avoid pricking egos) a believer such as I once was must explain:
Why is my supernatural experience (SE) more likely to be actually supernatural than simply brain induced?
Why does my SE reveal emotionally satisfying information but nothing else?
Why do I get a specific SE but other people get contradictory ones or non at all?
Why do I think myself immune to perception failures even if I can perceive myself having one (I.e. I can experience an illusion despite understanding it)?
Why do I share my SE when the only route to this knowledge is actually for someone else to have a subjective SE?
Why do I presume to understand the process to achieve my SE will work on another person when in fact I am perceiving a will driven being who provides SE according to his will rather than my process?
Why does my SE allow me to monopolise and redefine words I neither created nor own( like 'love', 'truth' or 'God') such that others can no longer use them unless they accept my ownership of the definition?
Why does my SE allow me to moralise that which is immoral ( killing, rape, slavery, child sacrifice, war, genocide, guilt, blackmail and so on.)?
Why am I unable to accept that others may have had an SE that generated similar behaviour patterns to mine but on investigation found it to be caused by something else and see how that is relevant to me?
P.s. to keep the thread on topic and to fulfill stereotypes - AG got away with it again!
PSacramento

If god is not detectable by virtue of his nature but can choose to modify / cloak / inhabit matter in such a way that he or his effects are detectable ( for example visions or walking on water ) then we can only suggest that people do not know about him because he chooses to remain undetectable. I do not have any truck with the illogical idea that we ( mere 100kg bags of animated star dust ) must look high and low for an unknowable being before he will decide the point at which he becomes perceivable, no that is rank stupidity, like expecting ants to have an appropriate attitude to us before we help them; the onus is completely on the father / teacher / master / creator / revealer figure to initiate the contact in an unmistakeable way.
YTou make a valid point.
IMO:
God "made" us in His image, we have attributes that can allow us to glimps God and a desire to "find" God, sort of a "I miss home" type of feeling, something is missing and incomplete.
God does NOT want to force Himself on Us and wants us individually ( God views us as individuals) to "find" Him on our own terms in our own way at our own pace.
I think that, perhaps, God knows that coming "crashing" into our world may do Us more harm than Good and that when we ( as individulas) are ready, we "find" Him.
I don't think the onus is on Him or should be because, well, if we are honest with ourselves, we usually do not WANT God to come crashing into OUR (individual) world and "take over" UNLESS we want something from God.
On another thread the poster siad this:
He interacted directly with people in early times. But time and again MAN went to making idols and making other men as kings. When he lead Israel out of Egypt, the Israelites did not have to lift a finger. He was dealing directly with them for quite awhile. But they kept on not wanting to deal with him directly, they kept wanting a human king over them. So things quickly began to change. He gave in and gave them a human king. Time after time a human being king became corrupt and lead all of them into corruption. When he was dealing with them directly, they kept rebelling and going to idols and human rulers.

So now we are living in a period of time where he isn't doing any "in the worlds face" events and sending angels and visually doing things that had been done before. And man is having man ruling, and the world is now quickly getting tired of human rulers. Everyone is saying, If there is a God, why doesn't he do anything. You know as a parent if you tell your child not to touch a stove because it's hot, they may not believe you or understand, so they have to experience it themself, if they ever touch a stove they won't do it again.

History with Israelites and what we are living in now, shows that power corrupts. And humanity is teaching and proving to itself that we do not want human rulers, and I think it will never be asked again. So this has been an appointed time, and a lesson of tough love.
I agree with many of his points but I don't think I would characterize it as "tough love" per say but simply God saying to us:
Your will be done.
tec

I have said that I believe that AGuest loves an entity and hears a voice that she calls her lord...I think that she is being deceived by a demon and she disseminates the teaching that that entity gives her.
Why do you think this? Because you think her actions are not in tune with Christ? Or because what she receives is not in tune with mainstream teachings?
I have said that I think that you are being deceived by that same demon, whether directly or through AGuest I don't know...but I don't think that you "follow" it and I've never said that. In fact, I've mentioned more than once that I think that you follow or display your own values and characteristics which are kind and nice...they appear to us all to be Christ-like.
I follow Christ.
But I will state that kind and nice are not necessarily flattering characteristics, nor necessarily Christ-like. Christ was bold in his speech. Christ spoke against hypocrites and pharisees and false teachers, and he called a spade a spade. I guarantee there were a lot of people who did not think he was kind and nice. Some did think he had a demon or followed a demon, though. None of the prophets were liked much either, because the people did not want to hear the truth being said. Same with the disciples/apostles, other than by their own, or they would not have been beaten, jailed, executed. They spoke boldly, and not necessarily 'nice' either, to those who spoke lies about Christ and God, or sometimes even about them. Paul and another even got into such a heated fight that they were forced to part ways altogether.
So I am not sure if the above reasons you state work out to prove anything.
But this is why I think you are being deceived. scripture states that when you are in Christ you are crucified with Him and it is no longer you that lives but Christ lives in you(gal 2:20)...and that God works to reveal His Son in you(gal 1:16)...and that you have put on Christ (gal 3:27)...and that Christ is being formed in you (gal 4:19) scripture also states that there is one Spirit of Christ and if that same Spirit that raised Jesus from the dead dwells in you...you are His. (romans 8:9,11). You have been deceived into believeing that AGuest has that Spirit of Christ without God having displayed any of His power in making her over to be of or reveal the same Spirit AS Christ. She admits that she is not like Christ but that she tries..."oh, how she tries but,..." she says. The truth is this...Jesus says, "If you abide in Me, I will abide in you." (1 corinthians 12:13)
Do you think that those who belong to Christ no longer sin?
Would you think better of someone if they said, yep... I am like Christ. I don't have to try. I just am like Christ... ?
Granted, Aguest may not always speak 'nice'... but does that mean to you that she does not speak truth or love... or that she does not live these things: love, truth, forgiveness? That she would not give to those in need, or to those who ask? That she does not forgive, or ask forgiveness for others?

Look, I appreciate you taking the time to explain. But are you sure you are making a 'right' judgment?
(this is a rhetorical question, btw. I do not require or even want an answer, because i am uncomfortable enough giving you a platform to continue to speak badly of another poster. Just wanted you to think about it)

Peace,
tammy
sabastious

So now we are living in a period of time where he isn't doing any "in the worlds face" events and sending angels and visually doing things that had been done before.
Revelation says that the Beast out of the Earth " performed great signs, even causing fire to come down from heaven to the earth in full view of the people." This is reminiscent of the scene in second Kings where Elijah is contending with the 450 prophets of Baal. The contest was to see who's God could send fire down from the heavens to consume an offering. So, what Revelation is saying is that the Beast of the Earth will be able to complete this task whereas the prophets of Baal could not, it shows an evolution of dark forces. What would have happened if the prophets of Baal were the ones who called fire down from heaven ande Elijah could not? That seems to be what the case is today. The Watchtower preaching work is a great example of a powerful work. The Beast has the upper hand and that's the purpose of this stage of humanity that we are currently in. Just my thoughts, PSac.
-Sab
PSacramento

Revelation says that the Beast out of the Earth "performed great signs, even causing fire to come down from heaven to the earth in full view of the people." This is reminiscent of the scene in second Kings where Elijah is contending with the 450 prophets of Baal. The contest was to see who's God could send fire down from the heavens to consume an offering. So, what Revelation is saying is that the Beast of the Earth will be able to complete this task whereas the prophets of Baal could not, it shows an evolution of dark forces. What would have happened if the prophets of Baal were the ones who called fire down from heaven ande Elijah could not? That seems to be what the case is today. The Watchtower preaching work is a great example of a powerful work. The Beast has the upper hand and that's the purpose of this stage of humanity that we are currently in. Just my thoughts, PSac.
I fair point in that it does SEEM that evil may have the upper hand, but it has seemed that way since the beginning hasn't it?
With Adam's fall, with Christ saying that Satan was the ruler in His time ( but also saying he rule was at an end when He was resurrected) and with all the crap we have to deal with today.
Fact is the the b attle between good and evil, order and chaos, the vorlons and the shadows ( :P ), has been and will be going on till the end of days.
I think that The Beast will indeed be able to do things that no other could be fore him, BUT I don't think that they will be miracles as such but simply that he will be able to stumble far more than every before.
sabastious
I fair point in that it does SEEM that evil may have the upper hand, but it has seemed that way since the beginning hasn't it? With Adam's fall, with Christ saying that Satan was the ruler in His time ( but also saying he rule was at an end when He was resurrected) and with all the crap we have to deal with today. Fact is the the b attle between good and evil, order and chaos, the vorlons and the shadows ( :P ), has been and will be going on till the end of days.
Yes, each side is always given equal opportunity. Revelation 11 has a seven year period broken up into two partitions: 42 months and 1260 days. To me it's highly significant that they are shown to be given equal time, but are represented by differing measurments of time. This could signify the differing ideologies of Good and Evil or cooperation and domination.
The 42 months depicts a group of people called the Gentiles who "trample the outer court of the holy city" for that time duration. Directly after that takesplace will come with another group that will prophecy for 1260 days completing the "7 year cycle." Further down the line in Revelation 13 the Scarlet Colored Wild Beast has the feet of a bear which means it has flat feet which are good for trampling. To me there is a direct correlation with the Trampling Gentiles of Revelation 11 and the Beast out of the Earth which is also the False Prophet that is thrown into the lake of fire in Revelation 20. We seem to be deep into the times of those trampling Gentiles and the Beast out of the Earth, who speaks in the name of the Scarlet Colored Wild Beast, which is why it's so hard to be a Christian in today's society both past and present. There is definitely liberty currently being given to the forces of Evil to make a point once and for all. It really does appear as if a godless future is on the horizon with the atheist movements and it's looked at as a thrilling prospect of peace and security. Because, they really do WIN when it comes to mainstream religion, but not against the Body of Christ. The Mormons for example have no official stance on Evolution. That means that the evolutionist argument TRUMPS them and they don't even have to disprove God, they just have to prove evolution is worthy of having an official stance on. If it is worthy and a religion reject's it, then they are a false religion and part of the Beast out of the Earth of Revlation 13. They are part of Bible prophecy.
Charles Darwin died in 1882 and decades later came the advent of the popular term, "I'll be a monkey's uncle."
( idiomatic ) (often preceded bywell) expressing complete surprise or disbelief
Well I’ll be a monkey's uncle! I would never have thought that tourists would go into space!
So the term is supposed to denote a complete surprise or disbelief. This term is strangely reminiscent of evolutionary theory. For the vast majority of our species existence we have firmly believed to have been created in the Image of God and there was no train of evolutionary development. So, to suddenly and unexpectedly discover that there were evolutionary links required millions of years ago for humanity to come to be you might have yelled out, "Well, I'll be a monkey's uncle!" Because there would be some truth as we share a common ancestor with all primates (making us "related" hence the term "uncle"). While the term is tongue-in-cheek, it could have been used with a derogatory connotation. As in: "I would never believe in something as ludacris as being related to primates."
So basically what I am saying is that the evolutionists lead by Charles Darwin was a total counter to mainstream religion and that's a sure sign that religion of today mostly consists of parties that are considered part of the "Beast of the Earth" which tramples on God's home for half of the time allotted (3.5 years). I hope that all makes sense.
-Sab
cofty

With Adam's fall,- PS
Surely not?
sabastious

I just realized I made a mistake, it's not the Beast of the Earth with the feet of the bear, it's the scarlet colored 7 headed wild beast being directed by the harlot city woman. The Beast out of the Earth is a false prophet and speaks FOR the scarlet colored wild beast, who is actually under control from the Dragon on the shore. It's so complicated! I get mixed up sometimes. I will have to edit the above post before the time runs out.
-Sab

Faith... and Trust: The Same Things?

Share this