GandalfTheWise

4 hours ago, keet said:

Honestly, that was exactly what entered my mind when I saw your nickname.  However, once I read your posts, I was surprised and impressed to realize that it was accurate and not pretentious or silly at all.

One of the biggest things God showed me many years ago is that He created every one of us to be, for lack of a better way to phrase it, epic in some unique way that shows His glory in a fallen world that is largely a spiritual battle zone.   As that happens, people will see God in what we do and His Spirit will naturally flow through us to those around us.  I now believe that our ministries are effective to the degree both that we grow spiritually and become more and more the person He created us to be.  I spent the first 3 decades or so as a Christian largely being a workaholic for God defining myself by gifts, talents, and ministry involvement and defining my "success" by how much fruit was being born by those things and how little I was sinning.  God sidelined me away from literally everything I was doing for a year or so, put me in front of a mirror, and I had no clue who I was looking at except that I'd gotten in the habit of thinking "Loser" to myself whenever I'd see myself in a real mirror.  As I started to see myself really for the first time and live life as that person, I found that ministry started to naturally flow with little effort and life became more peaceful.  My gifts and talents became tools to wield and use rather than what defined me.

There's an enemy and world out there that screams "who do you think you are to be anything special" to shame us and stop us all from becoming the person God created us to be.  I think this attack often starts as we are children and adolescents.   Now, I'm not talking about becoming Christians and the transformation that occurs to all of us as new creations in Christ where fruit of the Spirit becomes more evident as we grow and mature, but rather that each of us is a unique creation and work of art in some way that reflects God's glory differently than others.  I used to look at people and try to help them grow as Christians and to see their gifts and talents and callings to encourage them to do useful things and be busy serving God.  Now I look at people and try to see who it is that God created them to be so they can flourish, learn to walk with God in the way He created them to,  and so God's Spirit will naturally flow through them to the world around them.

When you look at people and try to see who that epic person is that God created them to be to reflect His glory in the midst of a world in spiritual warfare, it becomes a lot easier to be patient with them, encourage them, help tend their wounds, and watch their back.  Twenty years ago, I thought the Christian life was mostly "stop sinning and get busy serving God to show how thankful you are and how much you love Him".  Now, my emphasis is "Figure out who God created you to be and learn to walk with Him as that person He made you to be."  

Some nice thoughts expressed in this thread, many of which reflect my own feelings.   I've been playing guitar, keyboards, and bass for a good 40 years now.  I've been a worship leader and filled a variety of roles at times.  I've done this in a variety of churches and have a few battle stories to tell myself.  

My own musical tastes are rather eclectic.  I just run in streaks where I enjoy listening to a lot of different things for a time.  At one point, I was one of those who threw out every non-Christian album I had and was an "expert" in hidden messages in popular music.  I usually don't link bomb, but I'm on the board of a low power FM Christian station that's been streaming online for about 15 years now.  It is one of the most eclectic combinations of Christian songs I've heard with a wide range of artists and genres.  The fellow running it had the goal that no song would be played more than 3 times per day, no song would repeat at the same time per day, so there are a few hundred songs in the rotation.  It's at 97x.fm (and has a streaming option).  

The only other point I'd add is this.  Much of the criticism directed at modern Christian music misses one important thing.  We are seeing this generation of music as it is being created.  What we see of past generations are the gems that have lasted. We don't see the myriads of forgotten songs.  For example, many of us know a handful of Isaac Watt's hymns.  Come Ye that Love the Lord, O God our Help in Ages Past,  When I Survey the Wondrous Cross, Alas and Did My Savior Bleed, and Joy to the World.   Most of his 750 or so songs are long forgotten.  Charles Wesley is known for the lyrics for many hymns including, And Can it be that I should Gain, Christ the Lord is Risen Today,  Come Thou Long Expected Jesus, Hark the Herald Angels Sing, and O For a Thousand Tongues to Sing.  We only know a handful of 6000 that he published.  A number of years ago going through my grandma's stuff, I found a number of old song books including one of Fanny Crosby.  She wrote about 8000 hymns and gospel songs in her life including Blessed Assurance, To God Be the Glory, and Praise Him, Praise Him.  I went through that song book and frankly didn't find any I liked.

If Isaac Watts, Charles Wesley, and Fanny Crosby are running at a rate where perhaps 1% of their songs are considered musical treasures in the church, I think we should cut modern Christian composers a bit of slack with regard to producing such music.   If we fail to encourage them, our generation is merely guaranteeing that should the Lord tarry, we won't have many musical treasures to contribute to the next generations of Christians.

3 minutes ago, MariaMe said:

I'm not sure where to start marketing this necklace, does anyone here have ideas where to start?

Sorry, I have no idea.  One of my daughters is a skilled weaver.  She has been have troubles with marketing too.

The conjecture that seems most reasonable to me is an earlier dating for some of the NT books.   With a post 70AD dating of the synoptic gospels, it seems surprising that the fulfillment of Jesus' words about the Temple and the fall of Jerusalem are not explicitly mentioned.  A post 70AD date for Hebrews too begs the question of why there is no mention of the physical fall of the Temple and cessation of sacrifices when that would be closely related to some of the themes of that book.  Then of course in many books there is simply no natural place mention of it might occur.

@Henry_iain  Very good post.

Being a Christian is much more about the social side of being with other Christians, actually living our lives, and spiritually growing than it is about dotting the i's and crossing the t's of various doctrinal matters (which all too often amounts to trying to proselytize those who disagree so that they'll be better Christians).

A number of years ago, God lead me to a Christian forum (which closed down many years ago) which had a huge impact in my life.  The core principle there was along the lines "you are a special creation of God and I will rejoice in that creation" and the guiding principle of interaction was "I will assume the best about this post I am reading."  It was at a time in my life where God took me out into a figurative desert for a time and that site was an oasis for me. 

There was a doctrinal section nicknamed "The Hockey Rink" where it was joked you needed to put on asbestos underwear before wading in and facing the flames.  There was a wider range of views there than here.  But, as soon as it was clear someone was struggling, that became the highest priority and any arguments dropped away.  I never waded into it much myself because it was too hot for me at the time.   But most people posted in the other sections and helped each other grow spiritually.  I really miss that place. 

For many, it was a place to be vulnerable in ways we rarely ever are.  One of the most frightening things for all of us is to reveal to others who we think God created us to be as unique individuals.  It's usually much easier for us to confess hidden sins, faults, and failings than it is to take off the mask and let others see who we are.  To be honest, most of us are much more ashamed to tell others who we think God made us to be than we are about sins and failings.  We hide behind labels and masks that are socially acceptable for fear of being laughed at or scorned.  Most of us are so used to seeing the masks in the mirror that we really don't know what our own face looks like anymore.  I'm not talking about gifts and talents (which I see as tools) or characteristics or demographics we have in common with others, but something more profound and deeper.  I mean the unique individual God created us to be.

That site was full of people pulling off masks and encouraging others as they did.  It was full of testimonies of healing, God's work in people's lives, and life experiences.  For probably about 6 to 9 months, I spent hours in the evening reading through past threads and posts.  I got to see God's working in various people's lives across years of posts and how they changed during that time.  There's no one who can tell you who God created you to be.  God just slowly helps us see ourselves, often by putting mirrors of various sorts in our way so we can see ourselves.  In hindsight, He'd been doing that my entire life, but I hadn't been recognizing it.

It was there I did what was perhaps the hardest thing I'd ever done.  All my online avatars and usernames had been some variation of stuff I was good at doing or some variation of a ministry such as guitarist, worship-leader, teacher, servant, didaskalos (Greek for teacher), and similar types of names.  It more or less reflected how I saw myself and was one of the masks I put on to show the world.   I'd been there for maybe six months, and it took me about two weeks of wrestling to finally change my username to what I knew God wanted me to and it was one of the scariest things I'd done.  It was a symbolic step but it meant leaving decades of comfortable mask-wearing and hiding behind.   I was honestly expecting remarks about it being silly or pretentious.  But instead, several people immediately gave encouraging words.  I remember the first post was from a young lady who said something like, "I just knew it.  That fits you so well."  The bottom line is that I think they were all seeing something that I hadn't myself.  Since then, I usually try to grab some variation of GandalfTheWise as a username as a reminder that my real purpose in places like this is to help people discover who God created them to be, to be encouraging, to help them shed unhelpful things, and to try to look through the various things they post to try to see that unique treasure and work of art God that has created them to be.

12 hours ago, GREENLILY said:

I was just reading in the scriptures about lust of the eyes and flesh and worldliness. I am now thinking what I do is sin. I create artwork to place on various products at an online store. I try to make beautiful designs and the product range is vast. This seems to go againt this verse, no? Tempting people to buy pretty items? 

Interesting question.   Here are a few thoughts.

Is the artwork honest or not?  If it is supplying helpful information, then it is a service.  Does it increase someone's knowledge about the product by making it easier to understand and view?  If so, that's a service.  Does it make it easier for someone to navigate the site and find what they need?  If so, that's a service.  On the other hand, if it is misrepresenting the product, that's problematic.

I guess it depends to some degree if the products provide some type of real value for the money for the people buying them.  Value is to some degree subjective to each person.  If you have some moral objection to the products themselves, then that might be reason to look for a different job.

If most of us look closely at our jobs, we can find some moral objection to it.  Anyone working at a large corporation is helping to enable its policies and its owners to make a profit.  Unless we are working for a company or organization with policies, management, products, etc. that we completely agree with, to some degree we are compromising.  In one sense, anyone who has ever worked at a restaurant has potentially contributed to the sin of gluttony.  Almost every job any of us has had can potentially lead to problems in some way or violate our morals in some way.  It's just a question of whether it rises to the level of having to take a personal stand or not.

As a deeper question, is this perhaps God's way of giving a hint to be looking for a different job in which your talents and passions might be better applied?  Sometimes it is through dissatisfaction or issues where we are at that God gets our attention to make changes.

48 minutes ago, johnthebaptist said:

I've never seen him use Mountain Mixture.

I didn't recall it either.  I looked it up.  I think it was added to the colors being sold as a pre-mix of darker stuff that he normally made by mixing colors together.

1 minute ago, johnthebaptist said:

Alizarin Crimson, Cadmium Yellow, Dark Sienna, Phthalo Blue, Sap Green, Titanium White, and Yellow Ochre, I think, are his usual colors. 

7 hours ago, George242g said:

To sum it all up: my life has been one big mess from the very start. No matter how hard I try, I can’t seem to get anywhere. I’ve encountered the father before in a dream, and I grew up religious. With that said, I know of God and his presence.  I am now leaning on that - on this faith - for a chance to be a “better me”.
 

Since this is a post in the “ASK NEW QUESTION” thread, I guess my question is: what is his plan for me? Who am I to be? Someone I am pleased with? Someone who did exactly what everyone told them to do, cave in to the nit-picking and negative comments and did exactly what they expected...fail?  Will I have suffered for naught? Mind you I’m grateful for what little I have, but a part of me wants to be selfish. To have a life like every other normal person me age;enjoy a fad;go on dates;go out with friends;get into a little bit of trouble - just a teeny-weeny little bit of young, fun, laddy-daddy fun;simply ENJOY life as everyone does.  Or remain in the shadows? To live and not have any sense of individuality or lasting impression on anyone - good that is? Will I forever be unhappy?

To give exposition about myself, I would state that...hmm...my nature from I was younger was of meekness. Yes!  An empathetic, meek, optimistic, easily pushed around little boy is what I was. In many ways, I am still that boy. I guess, you can say I was soft. The type to never win an argument;not have a string of good luck;easily yelled at;mocked;beraded;degraded;fearful;easily manipulated, hurt, discouraged, remorseful.  I’ve always been a less assertive person, a lamb, letting the wolfs have at me to not say a thing. Even when put into situations where I should have been a little harsh, I could never muster up the courage or the “gall”. I’ve struggled in my home life, social life(for the majority was “school”, where I didn’t very much have many good memories ) - and now that I’m a young adult(not to long turned the big one - eight) I am struggling in my financial life(though I was struggling financially before, but now more so than ever). It’s a lot more I could go on about. But it pains me so to talk about all of my problems, I doubt you would want to read any more. Or I doubt I would want to talk more about, as to seem pitiful or needy.
 

Getting my point across again: is there ANY prophet who can find out what God has planned for me? If not what is his plans for me, can you guarantee that I’d live the good life that I want to live?

The real question is who is the unique person God created you to be?   We often get hung up asking what God wants us to do rather than asking who the unique individual is who He wants us to become.  

The starting point for that is not us trying harder to be better but to accept Jesus Christ in our hearts.  Christians use a number of different terms for this, born-again, born of the Spirit, accepting Christ, being saved, and conversion.   Most Christians' testimonies are similar about this.  It is a point in our lives where God makes us aware of our spiritual situation and that we cannot fix ourselves, but need Him to do it.   Most Christians' testimonies include acknowledging our sinfulness and inability to change ourselves, but that God has to forgive us and change us.  Most testimonies include some sense of becoming aware of God's presence and feeling different.  Some describe it in terms where it seems the heavens opened and others talk about simply starting to feel a calm peaceful presence of God within.  This seems to vary person to person.   At this point, God makes us into a new creation and starts to change us.

I think a good analogy for our Christian walk is like God having planted a garden.  As the garden is tended, it will grow and flourish.  Some things show up quickly and others take time.  Galatians 5:22-23 lists fruit of the Spirit which is a description of what we will be like as we are transformed by God's work in us.  This is not like new year's resolutions where we try to use discipline and resolve to change but rather that God works in us and starts to change us from within so that those things naturally emerge as part of our lives.  Patience does not mean taking an anger management class and learning to count to 10, it means God changing us so that certain things simply no longer cause a negative reaction on our part.  

In addition, I believe God created each of us to be a unique individual that will reflect God's glory in a way unique to each of us.  There's an enemy and a world that hates God and wants to stop that from happening.  Sometimes, we get attacked and crushed at the very points God intends to be our strengths and uniqueness.  An artist or creative person might face severe discouragement and insults that hurt them and lead them to stop sharing their work.  A caring loving person might be abused to the point they stop trusting and helping people.   A part of what God does in our lives is heal and restore those things that were injured and damaged so that we become the work of art He intended for us to be.

Learning who God created us to be is a lifelong journey and adventure where we walk with God and become that person.  He may use others at times to give us good advice and wisdom.  At times, God's Spirit might touch someone to speak things to us (perhaps what you call prophecy) for particular situations for encouragement and guidance.  However, God is the One showing us through various means who He created us to be.  He wants us to look to Him, not the means He is using.

A few books that helped me on this point about 10 or 15 years ago were "Waking the Dead" and "Wild at Heart" by John Eldridge.

Ultimately, a "good life" is walking through life as the person God created us to be.  In some ways, it might look like what we expect.  In other ways, it will look completely different.

I ran across this thread by chance and I'm glad I did.  I just listened to your newest tracks for the last half hour or so.  Nicely done.  I've been a musician for 40+ years now and appreciate the effort it takes to do this.  Is that your violin playing recorded live in Snow Fall Night?

I'll be putting those on to listen to at various times as the mood strikes me.  Thanks for sharing.

Unfortunately, I don't have any good recordings of my playing.   My strength as a musician tends to be improvising and flowing with a chord progression.   It's been many years since I played in groups or worship teams.  Now my only recording capability is my computer or phone microphones which make for pretty poor quality recordings.  

@Wynona    Roughly speaking, there are 3 general environments for how we dress: public, casual around home, and in the bedroom.   What's appropriate in one might not be in another.   But phrasing that another way, what not's appropriate in one might be in another.   Our dress, hygiene, hair cuts, appearance, etc. in private and public does have an impact on our relationship with our spouse.   A part of how I dress is driven by avoiding my wife saying "you're not going out looking like that, are you?"  Going someplace and having part of her mind occupied with being embarrassed over how I'm dressed is simply not constructive.  Wearing something during the day that bothers her affects our relationship.  She hates cargo pants though I think they are the greatest clothing invention ever.  I don't wear them because she simply cannot get past her dislike for them and they constantly distract her.  Obviously that's not a modesty or morality issue, but it strikes to the reality that such things can affect our relationship and how much we enjoy being around each other.

To some degree modesty is a subjective thing.  It is different to dress attractively than to dress to advertise availability.  It is different when it comes from guilt and shame rather than positive motives.   It is different to dress when our spouse is the only person to see us versus strangers.  We should have different levels of modesty around our spouse versus casual acquaintances or strangers.

Without knowing the real fundamental reason why your husband is asking, it's not possible to give a helpful answer.   Sometimes the particular issue being argued about in a marriage is a symptom of something deeper.   I think the important thing is to figure out what his real motive is.   Is it a selfish one he should back down from?  Or is he just tired of never seeing his attractive wife in anything other than a gunny sack and looking like his grandmother?  I'm not saying this is the case, but if how you dress reminds him of his grandmother, that is going to really mess with his emotions in a negative way.  If there is something like that going on, it's worth doing something about it.

It can take some work to figure out what the real issue is sometimes.  Often we aren't aware of it ourselves.  I think the real key here is figuring out what it is that he really is asking for and why.  If how you are dressing is causing negative feelings in him, it's not constructive in the long run and needs to be worked out in some manner you are both comfortable with.

To fill in a bit of historical background (at least how it was related to me).  I once had a talk with an old AOG minister at a campus ministry retreat back in the 80s.  He'd grown up pentecostal so was acquainted with the first generations of them.  Take this as my recollection of firsthand and secondhand comments from someone who saw some of this occur.  This is an oversimplification, but I'm trying to hit the high points.

The topic of water baptism in the name of Jesus versus Father, Son, and Holy Spirit was a serious matter among some early pentecostals.   Basically, pentecostals split ways over this argument.   Some saw using Jesus' name in prayers and everything else as a necessity for Christians and that using the formula Father, Son, and Holy Spirit for prayers and everything like many mainline churches did was an excuse to keep the name of Jesus out of churches.  They saw water baptism in Jesus' name as being a defining mark of being a Christian.   Over time, the two camps went their separate ways.  He (like many) used the term "Jesus-only" to describe them.  His view was that the Jesus-only camp became very rigid on this with some not accepting Christians who were water baptized via the Trinitarian formula in contrast to in the name of Jesus explicitly. 

As far as I can tell, most oneness Pentecostals are not that far removed from standard Trinitarian belief.  The big thing for me is that they believe Jesus was both God and man and that salvation is through Him alone.  This is in contrast to most non-Trinitarians who either explicitly deny the deity of Jesus or explicitly deny the humanity of Christ.  The oneness Pentecostals proclaim Jesus as God and man.   As are as I can tell, they reject the term Trinity (the few I knew seeing it as an RCC invention meant to keep the name of Jesus suppressed) but seem to use descriptions and explanations that are not far off those used by most Trinitarians.  It's been years ago since I looked at this in detail, but back when I did, I was satisfied at the time that most of the differences were more based in word choices and definitions than actual differences in beliefs. 

I'd emphasize this is a post based on anecdotes rather than exhaustive research.

5 hours ago, Unit 11 said:

Sin disguised as virtue?

I'm been thinking lately, that it's one thing when you commit a sin but know it's wrong. You have to rectify it. It's something else when you're led to believe it's okay--or even noble--under certain circumstances.

I've related now and then about a home fellowship group I attended during the Clinton years. The leader was a sold-out Dobson Disciple who listened to Focus on the Family every day. And what he heard, he passed on: the liberals were destroying our country and had evil designs on our kids. ("They're coming after our kids," he said once.) We needed to be politically active, oppose them, overcome them. A believer who wasn't politically active was just "lazy," according to his missus. There was such a strong vibe of Us against Them. 

Only recently I've considered those years in light of Paul's admonitions in Ephesians 4 and Colossians 3, to name a couple. Is it all right for Christians to hate under any circumstances? It seems like regardless of the object, it'll corrode and harden us, and that can't go too well with God's spirit. And looking at Galatians 5, hatred is also named among the fleshly things; those who practice them won't inherit God's kingdom. 

And yet, say you're following a leader, a famous radio minister with a slew of books and a following of thousands...and he hates someone, in this case the liberals. You look up to him, you trust him, and so if he hates those people, then you should too, right? It's Godly and it's righteous. You're fighting for Family! And so how will you get over it then?

Just saying...

 

I see most of the issue in things like this being when Christians do not exhibit clear fruit of the Spirit in their lives, actions, and words.  One debate that seems to arise over and over again is assuming that one has to choose between "being kind and loving to all" and "standing up for the truth" and then debating which is more important.  In my opinion, those most effective at standing up for the truth are those whose tone, words, and attitude constantly exemplify Galatians 5:22-23.     I think some Christians lose sight that we are not fighting people but rather power and principalities.    When it turns into choosing between "love" and "truth", I think we've lost sight of the big picture which must include both.

1 hour ago, Omegaman 3.0 said:

I would consider the Libertarian Party, if two things were different. One, they would have to have more of a following, so that they would be as viable as their ideas are practical, but I am not a fan of their general thought that there is no such thing as actual morality, I understand why they take that stance, but as a Christian, is it too large an error to support.

I do like the idea, of miniomal government, and practical economics!

  That's why I call it "leaning".  Those are the two things that I am least comfortable with as well.  I've spent some time attending a few meetings of the local group and am connected via social media (mainly to get to know more about them).   One observation is that there appear to be two "factions" for lack of a better word.  The "pragmatists" (the majority) who see a role for limited gov't as a protector of individual liberties and freedoms and the "anarchists" (a vocal minority) who theoretically see no role for gov't believing that voluntary associations can completely fulfill that role.  The second observation is that the membership I saw was a combination of devout Christians and devout agnostics and atheists.   Libertarian writers and proponents tend to fit into these different categories so any particular thing you read or hear often reflects those differences.  There are those who see no absolute morality and there are those who hold to absolute morality but don't trust any gov't to have the power to enforce morality.  Though motives differ, the net approach to what gov't should and shouldn't be able to do is similar.

I've also been looking at the American Solidarity Party which was largely Catholic to begin with but is starting to expand.  Definitely a fringe party compared to the Libertarians (who were on the ballot on all 50 states).  I've been connected with their social media groups (mainly to learn more about them).  They are a relatively new party that is feeling its way out and still developing a more detailed platform.  

The bottom line for me is voting Libertarian or any other third party is ultimately the only "None of the Above" vote available to most people that does anything tangible since it gives 3rd parties potentially more ballot access in the future.  It provides more incentive to the two dominant parties to be responsive to voters than not voting or always giving them a vote as a less of two evils compared to the other.

7 hours ago, BibleReader said:

Her mother left the house when she was just a toddler and her dad did not express affection but rather frustration and anger for the most part.  Now, she's an adult, but she experiences self-hatred and negative feelings.  She does a lot for others since she has pretty much always taken her mom's place, but she doesn't feel that anyone really loves her.  She's married, has a good husband, but constantly feels an emptiness inside.  She has been praying about this.  Thanks in advance.  

Often when we are young and vulnerable, things happen to us and we start to believe lies about ourselves.  Those lies become so embedded in our hearts that we think of them as reality and we react and feel as if they are real.  Lies such as "I'm useless", "I'm stupid", "No one could love me", "I'm a loser", "It's all my fault" can become things we believe about ourselves.   We really need God's Spirit to work in us in some way to shine His light in our hearts to see those lies for what they are and reject them.  I've heard testimonies where this just happened all at once when praying with someone.  I've heard testimonies where it took some time with a Christian counselor.  

Here's a link to a page at the Transformation Prayer Ministry site.  I've known some people who've been ministered to by this.  God did some emotional healing in my life some time ago, and when I read about this ministry found that it was much the same thing.   Ed Smith is a pastor and counselor who was led into a ministry to help people find emotional healing.  That's an overly simplistic description, but this page has links to a few videos where he talks about this.  https://www.transformationprayer.org/preparing-journey-introduction/

What we believe about ourselves, others, and situations can have a huge impact on our emotions.  Ed Smith gives a good example.  He talked about waking up in the middle of the night hearing something in the house.  If you believe someone broke into your house, a lot of strong emotions will probably take hold.  When you walk into the kitchen and find your dog digging through the garbage, you'll feel emotionally better because your belief now matches a more benign reality.  When we believe things such as that we are useless or no one loves us, we tend to cease to believe anything positive people say to us and we interpret things they do in a negative way.  Instead of being thankful when someone does something nice for us, we potentially get cynical and wonder what their ulterior motive is or think they are doing out of pity.

There are some things in our lives that we change by working on them ourselves.  There are other things that require some type of healing and help.  Things like this often require God's healing touch in some way.   For myself, I had a few ingrained lies for decades in my life.  One of them was "I don't know what I'm doing."  In a time of prayer, God had me reflecting on a time where I'd been essentially physically and verbally abused for "not doing something correctly" during a HS sports practice.  As I reflected on it, I just suddenly realized, "Hey, I did know what I was doing.  The coach was an idiot teaching bad technique."  In that moment, that lie just vanished away.  Within a few weeks, my wife and kids had noticed a difference in me.

In case anyone is interested, here's a summary/transcript of a video of Lester Sumrall that seems to be what is being referenced in this thread in case they want to listen/read things for themselves as to what he said.  I don't know anything about the site in this link and cannot comment about other content there or anything.

http://whygodreallyexists.com/archives/7-warning-signs-for-america-a-prophetic-word-given-to-lester-sumrall-in-the-1980s

As far as I can tell, this is what is being referenced as the authority on at least part of this thread.

Here's a link to an article by George Howard about this.  https://bfainternational.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/Howard-updated-1998-explanation-1.pdf    It is included in a brief article https://bfainternational.com/hebrew-gospel-matthew/ discussing it.     I skimmed through these articles and here is a summary of what I found.

I strongly emphasize that George Howard himself says "I conjecture that a Shem-Tob type text of Matthew goes back to an early period of the Christian era."  (I added the underline to emphasize it.)  He is NOT making any type of claim that this manuscript tradition is superior to the Greek one NOR that this tradition was the basis for the Greek one.  He looks at the doctrinal peculiarities in it to attempt to figure out what groups might have produced it or used it.

As far as I can tell, here is what he is saying versus what he is not saying.

He is saying that some existing Hebrew manuscripts of Matthew (in particular The Shem-Tob one) appear to have descended from an early manuscript tradition.  It is not a perfect copy of such an original, but likely contains sections that reflect the original form as well as sections from later works.  There is a good possibility that some parts of this manuscript come from a Hebrew text of Matthew that existed early on.  He attempted to date it by looking at variations between it and the Greek text that produced doctrinal differences and comparing those things to beliefs of various early groups.  He was unable to date it any more precisely than somewhere in the first to fourth centuries of the church.

He is saying that there is evidence that suggests that this manuscript tradition was Hebrew in origin and not a translation.  This does not mean there was no Greek influence or that this was written first, but rather that the original author was not merely translating Greek.   He presents NO evidence NOR suggests at all that the Greek Matthew tradition came from this one.

He is NOT saying that this manuscript tradition is canonical nor that it was accepted by Christians as a whole nor that it was a basis for the Greek text of Matthew.  Here is the final part of his summary:

"I further suggest that this form of the Gospel of Matthew was produced by a Jewish Christian or a Jewish Christian group that was all but forgotten in early times. This person/group maintained strict observance of the law, believed that the righteous among the Gentiles would be saved in the age to come, observed only the baptism of John, elevated John the Baptist to an exalted position, and may have believed that Jesus became the Messiah sometime during his career."

In other words, his best guess is that this was a work produced by someone outside the mainstream of many Christians and churches.   In other words, it might have been something that would have found favor with groups such as those early Jewish Christians that said that the gentile believers had to adhere to the law of Moses.

My initial reaction is to put this into a similar category with works by early Christians such as the Didache or Shepherd of Hermes which were read by many Christians but not given the status of canon.  I'd be hesitant to consider unique sections of the Hebrew Matthew to be canonical.

One thing to be aware of is this.  The Jehovah's Witnesses have strong doctrinal reasons for wanting the Hebrew text of Matthew to be the original one with the Greek one being a corrupted version.  My sense of things is that some articles written about the Hebrew text of Matthew draw from JW writings on the topic.  I'm not saying this about George Howard, but rather that his work seems to be taken by some as revealing a lost truth of NT origins rather than a conjectural scholarly exercise (which is what it seems to be). 

Here's my take on what I've been seeing.

As a disclaimer, my US political leanings are best described as Libertarian.  In one oversimplified sentence, I think that federal gov't overreach in the US needs to be reigned in with most political power being in the hands of local and mid-size government (meaning roughly county to state level) with a reduction of government control over many things and a reduction of the federal government scope.

As far as I can tell, here's my current best guess in describing the US political scene.  The real control of things in the US is in the Washington DC/New York City region by people whose background tends to be Ivy league schools and come from families that have known each other for generations and have various degrees of ties to the old money families.  Many influential employees, managers, and directors of large financial firms, banks,  news outlets, and various federal government agencies have connections of various sorts with each other.  They think they are smarter and better than everyone else and entitled to run the country and ultimately the world for their benefit.   By controlling the US media, finance system, and ultimately the US military, they can do just about anything they want to around the world.   I'll just refer to them as the establishment elite.   This is not some secret group in black hoods meeting at midnight.  This is just a bunch of people who grew up in the same system, share a common worldview, have a lot of social connections, look out for their own interests, and via various forms of nepotism, get influential positions in many places.  It is to their benefit to consolidate as much power as possible at the federal level to make it easier to run things.   My impression is that something similar is happening with the EU but I haven't been following that closely enough to have a good sense of that.

Politicians in the US (at the federal level and to an increasing degree at the state level) ultimately get elected by having two things.  The first is the support of the establishment elite.  This means favorable news coverage and publicity, lots of money for campaigning, and the expertise and manpower to navigate the complicated system of election laws that make it virtually impossible for 3rd party candidates to have a chance.   In order to win elections, the elite needs to create voting blocs whom they can target and emotionally manipulate.  People with similar demographics are targeted to make them scared and angry with other demographic groups.  In other words, they only "care" about whether you have lots of money and favors you can do them or you are part of some demographic group that will give them votes.   Also, as long as they can get various groups terrified and enraged with each other, no one will notice who is pulling the strings.

For the elite, poor people (meaning pretty much all of us) are pawns they use to increase their wealth and influence either as employees and or in the military.  Oversimplifying things here for space:   Ivy league business schools have lead to the decimation of the US economy at a local level.  They taught "managers" how to increase shareholder value.  In other words, how to gut a company in the short term to make stock prices go up and how to run mergers that you can get paid huge fees to merge two competitive companies in a single less efficient one.  Pocket the money now, go on to the next job, and leave a trail of unemployed people and empty buildings behind.  I've lived in the midwest my entire life and have watched the economy slowly decline.   Federal legislation and oversight of various things often benefits large corporations by requiring things that only established companies can easily afford to do.  Gov't reactions to COVID have accelerated this process by moving years of economic decline into weeks and months.  My impression is that the elites have no clue what is happening to the masses since their comfortable lives in DC/NYC  have been unaffected.  This is not even getting into US military, economic, and financial influence around the world that expands the wealth and influence of this group.

I think that this is the backdrop to really understand Trump support.   Trump campaigned as a populist for the masses against the system of elites.  It's an open question if he is a populist or merely saw a huge untapped business opportunity that the elites had been overlooking.   He gave voice to tens of millions of frustrated people who saw the elites as out of touch parasites in DC and NYC who were slowly taking away their jobs, resources,  and way of life.  As far as I can tell, many of the elites saw him as a critical threat to the status quo and pulled out all the stops to vilify and get rid of him.  I've never seen such radicalization of opposition to someone in the four decades I've been following US politics.  I don't think it was so much Trump they despised but rather what he represented, people who were fed up with the elite.

The biggest thing I'm hoping for is that the establishment elites will pull out the welcome mat from the radical marxists who've been allowed an oversized voice lately in academia, social media, political protest, and the burgeoning far left in the US.  That's the only thing that deeply concerns me.  There is simply no place for Christians with those people in charge except as an underground church.  I'm hoping the establishment elite merely saw them as useful idiots to create a lot of unrest to help get rid of Trump rather than actual allies who will get a seat at the table.  

11 hours ago, Saved.One.by.Grace said:

Stress

relax

16 hours ago, NotAllThere said:

However, maybe I don't care because I didn't study biology after the age of 13 - concentrating on real science, like Physics. 

Another physicist here?  

I think this is the link to it.    https://www.worthychristianforums.com/forum/144-videos/   Just go to the main front page of the forum and scroll down aways.

If you are posting videos, they need to be put into the proper section on the site where they await moderator approval.   This is true of any video on this site regardless of topic.

9 minutes ago, Momma_Bear said:

and it goes on and on.... and on.... 

Speaking for myself... I have found certain truths necessary to discover... Over the years... I have been baffled by the term "Christian unity"... I have also been baffled over the scripture that you have posted regarding unity in essentials and liberty in non-essentials. @GandalfTheWise

I do not call out names of pastors or teachers... It's not my place to openly condemn those who preach any kind of platform... I do however ignore them... and refuse to listen to any teachings of the Word of Faith/Prosperity Doctrine... I simply have no desire to fill my mind with what is being taught. That is a choice that we all have... and that I exercise. 

With the issue of loss of salvation... I struggled with this one... and I am guilty of much fighting over those who would suggest that a Christian can lose their salvation... To me ... it doesn't get more essential than knowing if a Christian can be secure in their walk....However... have found that this site does not see this as an essential... and so I don't fight anymore... but neither do I listen to those preaching about the ability to lose salvation...

I guess this makes my world very small... but I am ok with that. 

Anyways... Not sure why my comment was chosen to highlight... but this is my response... 

I really have come a long way in these last months.... I just keep to myself... and mind my own business... I have given up trying to understand Christian unity... as I do not believe it exists. 

 

 

 I truly hope you didn't take my post as an attack or rebuke because it was not meant as such.   It just seemed a good starting point for some comments on what false teaching is.  For the most part, Christians agree it should be confronted, but disagree on what it is.

The essentials/non-essentials statement is not a scripture quotation but rather a saying that many Christians think is a good summary of how we should act toward one another.   It became well known through the Moravian revival where Christians with a range of doctrinal views and backgrounds fleeing persecution formed a community in Herrnhut (now in Germany).  Many trace much of modern Christian missions to this small community.  

For me, Christian unity is rooted in Jesus' prayer for Christians in John 17 (specifically verses 11,21, 22, and 23).  For example, 22 I have given them the glory that you gave me, that they may be one as we are one— 23 I in them and you in me—so that they may be brought to complete unity. Then the world will know that you sent me and have loved them even as you have loved me.  John 17:22-23 NIV.  In addition, I'd toss in Psalm 133:  1 Behold, how good and how pleasant it is for brethren to dwell together in unity! 2 It is like the precious ointment upon the head, that ran down upon the beard, evenAaron’s beard: that went down to the skirts of his garments; 3 as the dew of Hermon, and as the dew that descended upon the mountains of Zion: for there the Lord commanded the blessing, even life for evermore.  Ps 133 KJV

The term "unity" is ambiguous today and used by various people to mean different things.  For me, Christian unity is when Christians (people with apparent fruit of the Spirit in their lives, clearly transformed lives, who can testify of Jesus Christ's work in their lives) in good conscious and peace and friendship can fellowship and minister together without constantly stressing out over differences.  I've been part of a few small limited communities where this is a reality.  We truly saw each other for who we each individually were as valuable unique individuals created by God to reflect His glory in unique ways.  Our doctrinal and political opinions were a minor blip on the radar screen compared to seeing each others' spiritual growth and rejoicing in it.  I've seen that such a community and relationships among Christians is possible and I think it is what God wants for us.

2 hours ago, Momma_Bear said:

While there are those who do call out NAMES... there are others who simply look at the doctrine/beliefs/teachings... and then simply choose to IGNORE all those in their groups... This is NOT about so and so... It is about FALSE TEACHING. 

Once of the biggest challenges facing Christians and the body of Christ is that there is not complete agreement on what constitutes false teaching.  There is an old church adage that has shown up in many forms over the centuries.  In essentials unity, in non-essentials liberty, in all things love.   The administrators of this site have clearly stated in the past that they wish to see this principle embodied on this site.

I think we need to clearly separate out fundamental issues (e.g. Jesus Christ is fully human and divine, Christ's atonement is the means of salvation, Trinitarian beliefs) from those things that are ultimately differences of opinion and preference among those who are Christians.  My observation is that I have personally known many Christians with different opinions and preferences who clearly exhibit fruit of the Spirit in their lives and show strong evidence of having their lives transformed by God over many years and decades in their lives.  

Off the top of my head, here's a partial list of things I've seen some label as false teaching on this site which have lead to personal attacks that someone is not a Christian for disagreeing.

A few years ago there was a group of people on here who believed that the Bible taught that the earth was flat.  To disbelieve that meant you rejected scripture.

Some believe that any who do not believe in young earth creationism reject scripture.

Some believe that acceptance of once-save always-saved is a heresy and some believe rejection of it is a heresy.  Some think that anyone who disagrees is a false teacher.

Some believe only one particular version of the Bible is the real one (usually the KJV but there was one advocate of only using the Wycliffe Bible here for a time).  Some of them believe Christians who don't use only the one correct version are being led into error.

Some believe in some form of cessationism (i.e. that spiritual gifts such as tongues, prophecy, healing, etc.) were only for the start of the church and that most occurrences of such things today are occult or demonic in nature.  Others believe that rejecting such gifts is blasphemy against the Holy Spirit.

Some believe that God does not speak to Christians in any manner today except through the Bible (and anything else is of human or demonic origin) whereas others believe that God does speak to Christians to day (in ways which will always be consistent with scripture). 

Some believe that not holding the correct view of end times means holding to false teaching.

Some believe that it is impossible for people belonging to particular denominations or churches to be Christians.

Some active on this site in the past (and probably some today) believed that disagreeing on some of these matters meant that a person was a heretic, a wolf, and not a Christian.  

I am very frustrated when Christians elevate their opinions to the level of fundamental Christian teachings.  The last church we went to before we moved was the best I'd been in in my life.  The last year there were a lot of conversions and about 100 adult baptisms in the year.  It was generally peaceful and harmonious (in spite of being in a city marked by political division and strife).  The church itself was a merger of two churches that had split from each other about twenty years before and reconciled.  One time I showed up early for a Saturday morning seminar and found most of the senior staff there (including the senior pastor) helping to set up chairs and tables along with everyone else.  The senior staff was humble and spiritual and clearly displayed fruit of the Spirit in their lives and interactions with everyone.  They truly lead by example.  In addition, they were wise and experienced people who could give good counsel on matters.  A part of the regular services were people from the congregation giving testimonies about what God was doing in their lives.  The church sponsors a satellite location for a well-known Christian university for people to get AA degrees in ministry.  One of the largest food banks in the state was started by members of the church.  There were a number of specialized and small group ministries which reached into the community.  People were encouraged to grow and step out into ministry.  When we moved to our current location, we started going to my mother-in-law's church (which we do like).  But I find it sad that this church is so concerned with doctrinal matters that multiple pastors confronting "false teaching" from the pulpit had a difference of opinion with our previous church in which they were basically calling them false teachers.  Most sitting in this church now believe that our previous church is to be avoided because of false teaching.

In this day and age, many Christians publicly practicing "discernment" are copying the social media practices of the world.  Much of what I've seen in public discernment is like so-called cancel culture where a mob mentality rules.  Accusation, anger, and reacting emotionally to out-of-context information are the main drivers of cancel culture.  Facts have little bearing and redemption is not allowed a place in it.   "I'm entitled to my opinion as well as to share it any time I feel like it and besides the person I'm accusing is so awful they deserve it" is accepted by many in the world but in my opinion is not a spiritually mature attitude to have.   Practicing discernment is like wielding a surgeon's scalpel.  In the hands of a skilled experienced surgeon, it can bring health and life.  In the hands of an inexperienced wannabe, it will more likely bring injury and death.  It needs to be done at the right time, in the right place, and in the right manner.  Some Christians wield it more like a butcher working on an impersonal side of beef than a surgeon carefully healing a human being.

The issue is not whether or not to point out errors.  The issue is how to do it spiritually, maturely, effectively, and at God's leading in a way that yields fruits of repentance and growth and builds the body of Christ.  When done unspiritually, immaturely, ineffectively, and in our own timing,  it leads to hard feelings, fights, and negative consequences that drive Christians apart and hinder ministry.   There's a reason most Christians in the body of Christ have expectations for a level of spiritual maturity, gifts, and abilities in anyone who participates in any ministry as well as a period of growth and mentorship of some type where they effectively learn to minister.   A tone deaf person with a poor but loud enthusiastic singing voice will likely be a distraction in a choir or worship team.  A new Christian who has not yet read the Bible through is unlikely to be an effective expository teacher no matter how educated they are or how good a public speaker they are.  Different people simply have gifts, talents, personalities, and experience that are much more suited to particular ministries than others.

Here's my analysis of the OP in light of these thoughts that pointing out errors and making accusations need to be done in an effective manner.  

All of the Bethel prophets said quite conclusively that God said that Donald Trump will have a second term. It is obvious that this is not going to be the case. This means that their prophecies were totally false and did not come from God at all. I wondered about that, and the answer came to me: God purposely arranged for a demonic lying spirit to speak through the mouths of these prophets to clearly expose these dreamers and charlatans to show genuine Christians that God definitely did not send them nor did He speak through them. He did it to show that not one of these prophets are sent from Him, not previously, not now, or any time in the future. Therefore, don't be deceived and drawn away from the true gospel of Christ through the lies of these false prophets.

I note there is no link to the original Bethel sources.  What are their names, how many of them, and was it all of them?  What did they say?  Who did they say this to?  All we have is a minimal summary which uses leading language such as "all of them" and "quite conclusively".   What were the specific predictions?   Why not put it out there for all of us to see and let us all judge it for ourselves?   Why do it now and not wait until after the processing of the election  results are certified, all court cases are resolved, and the electoral college has officially voted the winner in mid-December?    To not supply links or supporting information is poor practice and reduces effectiveness and credibility.   Even worse was the later attitude expressed by some that lack of documentation is completely acceptable and that criticizing lack of documentation is not acceptable.  

My sense of things is that a number of Christians predicted Trump would win while claiming various degrees of spiritual inspiration and certainty about this.  Did God put a lying spirit in all of their mouths to discredit them?  If so, why not name all of them?  If not, why only this group?  At what point was it uninformed zeal and wishful thinking that some Christians turned their hopes and beliefs into predictions rather than being driven by demons? In other words, how do we tell the difference between human error and demonic influence?   Does it mean any Christians predicting a Trump win are forever banned from any form of ministry?  Does it nullify everything they have ever said or will ever say?  To put it very bluntly, this is an accusation which in essence is claiming some degree of spiritual revelation or authority to make.  It's not clear what the phrase "the answer came to me" means.  Is this a claim of divine revelation of "God spoke this to me"?  Or is it a claim of about having special wisdom to see things others don't?  Or is it merely a possible human conjecture based on other information or previous opinion?  In any case, it is ultimately a claim of having adequate personal authority to make such an accusation public.   There is further a claim that "He did it to show that not one of these prophets are sent from Him, not previously, not now, or any time in the future".    This basically claims to know the mind of God. Where does proof of this come from?     If this is a conjecture and opinion, that should be made clear.  If it is a claim of special revelation of truth for all Christians to listen to, that should be made clear.

This is just off the top of my head as to why this is a less than effective example of pointing out error.  It assumes a lot of prior knowledge on the part of readers.  It does not provide any supporting links or information.  It makes claims about what is happening in the unseen spiritual realm.  It makes claims to know the mind of God in this matter.  It is a serious claim that leaders of a church are demonically influenced because God wants to discredit them.  Such claims need to be clearly and solidly documented.  Calls for documentation should not be dismissed but rather heeded.  If not, all we have is an empty accusation based on someone's opinion.

In my opinion, a much more effective OP would have been to link to a number of prophecies or predictions of a Trump win from a number of different people from the original sources in context.  This way we could read them all for ourselves and compare them and judge how much spiritual authority they were claiming.  It would have been more effective to wait until the election process is complete (which won't be until at least mid-December) to compare exactly what they said with what happened.  It would have been more effective to allow us to compare the Bethel predictions with others to get a sense of the potential demonic involvement with everyone who made an incorrect prediction.   It would have been more effective to clearly state how much spiritual authority is being claimed as to whether knowledge of demonic involvement came from special revelation, from special wisdom, or was merely an unsubstantiated conjecture.  All of those reading the OP would then be in a position to evaluate it.

Effectively pointing out errors and making accusations requires effort, care, and research.  It needs to be done with God's leading and with fruit of the Spirit and spiritual maturity evident in our tone and words and reasonings.  It requires us to allow others to clearly see what evidence we have and why we think what we do.  People who express their opinions are a dime a dozen.  Cancel culture is full of them and they have destroyed many lives doing this.  As Christians, we need to be very different from the world. We cannot simply post our opinions and ask other people to shun other Christians without presenting some compelling reasons for doing so.   This post is my opinion as to why the OP was ineffective and my reasons for thinking this.  This post also contains my opinion as to concrete actions that could be taken to make it more effective.  I spent a few hours writing this because I think this can be a good learning example as to how to more effectively contend for the truth in matters like these.  Please note that I have not commented directly on the validity of the OP but merely that it fails to give me any compelling reason to accept it.   A large part of effectively confronting errors is doing things in a way that builds credibility and gives people reasons to trust what we say.    Once we have established a long term pattern of saying credible and trustworthy things that people can trust, we might earn the privilege of being able to express opinions with a minimum of documentation.  But until then, we need to take the time and effort to do things effectively.