Is anyone else a Seer?

[jeremiah1five]

Paul does not need Old Testament authority.

Of course he did. He'd make a statement and if he needed to support it - which he always did when necessary - he'd post the Old Testament authority to support what he writes. Matthew did it. Peter did it. We do the same thing here. ALL true born of God Christians do this.
Then there's the other group which you belong in that places all your teaching on the New Testament to the exclusion of the Old Testament. People that do that end up with all kinds of crazy heresy that lead others astray.
Like what you do.

You are begging the question, assuming the New Testament cannot contain new revelation.

Nope. There is no new revelation in the New Testament that cannot be found under the anointing in the Old Testament. Saul quoted the Old Testament frequently to support the things he wrote or said because if there's no Old Testament precedent, then there is no New Testament reality. But I take it you've never been discipled in the things of God, never learned obedience, nor true, sound doctrine.

Paul got his revelation from Christ and is an apostle . You however are not and do not possess the authority he had.

I received my revelation the same as Saul. The same as Pete, Johnny, and James. From the Old Testament. Jesus did the same thing teaching from the Old Testament. Are you saying Jesus was wrong to do this?

Galatians 1:12 (KJV 1900) — 12 For I neither received it of man, neither was I taught it, but by the revelation of Jesus Christ.

That's right. He didn't receive it of man. He had the Old Testament and under the anointing with all his training as rabbi and experience in how to study, learned from the Old Testament everything he needed to know about the New Covenant, such as that it is the Mosaic Covenant fulfilled.

You have not received the personal revelation Paul received and you like Paul once was are fighting against the will of Christ

If you knew Scripture, you'd know about these things. And since you were not there when I became born again, when I spoke in tongues, when the pastor laid hands on me, when God spoke to me, and the revelation God has given me from Scripture...well, you weren't there and cannot judge.
I don't think you even know how to test (1 Jn. 4:1-2.)
You're infected like the rest of Gentiles with a Gentile theology that just has too much boo boo in it.
But you wouldn't know because you're blind.
You're happy with the rest of Gentiles who think nothing of stealing Israel's inheritance.
Thou shalt not steal.
Oh, that's in the Old Testament. Maybe we don't have to obey that, huh?

 

[TomL]

Of course he did. He'd make a statement and if he needed to support it - which he always did when necessary - he'd post the Old Testament authority to support what he writes. Matthew did it. Peter did it. We do the same thing here. ALL true born of God Christians do this.
Then there's the other group which you belong in that places all your teaching on the New Testament to the exclusion of the Old Testament. People that do that end up with all kinds of crazy heresy that lead others astray.
Like what you do.

Nope. There is no new revelation in the New Testament that cannot be found under the anointing in the Old Testament. Saul quoted the Old Testament frequently to support the things he wrote or said because if there's no Old Testament precedent, then there is no New Testament reality. But I take it you've never been discipled in the things of God, never learned obedience, nor true, sound doctrine.

I received my revelation the same as Saul. The same as Pete, Johnny, and James. From the Old Testament. Jesus did the same thing teaching from the Old Testament. Are you saying Jesus was wrong to do this?

That's right. He didn't receive it of man. He had the Old Testament and under the anointing with all his training as rabbi and experience in how to study, learned from the Old Testament everything he needed to know about the New Covenant, such as that it is the Mosaic Covenant fulfilled.

If you knew Scripture, you'd know about these things. And since you were not there when I became born again, when I spoke in tongues, when the pastor laid hands on me, when God spoke to me, and the revelation God has given me from Scripture...well, you weren't there and cannot judge.
I don't think you even know how to test (1 Jn. 4:1-2.)
You're infected like the rest of Gentiles with a Gentile theology that just has too much boo boo in it.
But you wouldn't know because you're blind.
You're happy with the rest of Gentiles who think nothing of stealing Israel's inheritance.
Thou shalt not steal.
Oh, that's in the Old Testament. Maybe we don't have to obey that, huh?

Sorry that is like saying Moses need a source to verify his writing

And Paul states he received it by revelation from Christ

 

[jeremiah1five]

Sorry that is like saying Moses need a source to verify his writing

He did. His source was the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.

And Paul states he received it by revelation from Christ

Saul received his revelation as I said through searching the Scriptures to understand the New Covenant era Israel found itself in. I receive revelation the same way. Through searching the Scripture under the anointing as commanded by God. I now I see that you don't. And now I see the reason why you're seeped in false Gentile theology that is just plain wrong. Not even the Word of God will change your mind. Sad. You must belong to one of those false fringe fellowships that rejects study of the Word of God for their revelation about this "so-great salvation." And if you don't search the Scripture for your revelation then you must be searching the word of man. Instead of being a man of God you are instead a man of men. Sad.

 

[TomL]

He did. His source was the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.

And Paul's source was Christ

Saul received his revelation as I said through searching the Scriptures to understand the New Covenant era Israel found itself in. I receive revelation the same way. Through searching the Scripture under the anointing as commanded by God. I now I see that you don't. And now I see the reason why you're seeped in false Gentile theology that is just plain wrong. Not even the Word of God will change your mind. Sad. You must belong to one of those false fringe fellowships that rejects study of the Word of God for their revelation about this "so-great salvation." And if you don't search the Scripture for your revelation then you must be searching the word of man. Instead of being a man of God you are instead a man of men. Sad.

Paul states he received it by revelation from Christ. That is the word of God you refuse to believe.



Galatians 1:12 (KJV 1900) — 12 For I neither received it of man, neither was I taught it, but by the revelation of Jesus Christ.

You can say what you want, but scripture says something else. So it is you who touts the word of man and it is you who are discordant with Christ's message of love and acceptance


BTW you assume scrolls and parchment means Old Testament only

“Scrolls” and “parchments” could be Paul’s own notes and records. They could also include portions of OT Scriptures and what later would become NT Scriptures

Robert W. Yarbrough, The Letters to Timothy and Titus (ed. D. A. Carson; Pillar New Testament Commentary; Grand Rapids, MI; London: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company; Apollos, 2018), 450.

The syntax of the sentence probably indicates that he had also left the other items mentioned, “the scrolls and parchments,” with Carpus. Precisely what writings he had in mind is not entirely clear, because of the range of written materials covered by the terms and because of the grammar of the clause. “Scrolls” (TNIV/NIV; “books,” NRSV) designates a written work in either the form of a scroll (rolls) or a codex (leafs sewn together into something like the modern book) made from papyrus, and could refer to portions of the OT.51 If small codices are meant in this reference, they would have served as notebooks. The second term translated as “parchments” refers to skins prepared for writing.

Philip H. Towner, The Letters to Timothy and Titus (The New International Commentary on the New Testament; Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 2006), 629.

So you deny what Paul states

Galatians 1:12 (KJV 1900) — 12 For I neither received it of man, neither was I taught it, but by the revelation of Jesus Christ.

to affirm what he did not clearly say

Again it is you who denies the word of God

1 John 3:14 (KJV 1900) — 14 We know that we have passed from death unto life, because we love the brethren. He that loveth not his brother abideth in death.

 

[jeremiah1five]

And Paul's source was Christ

That's right: Christ. = "Messias = "Anointing" = Holy Spirit. The same way we today receive our revelation when we read and study Scripture. From the Holy Spirit.
But Jesus did not leave heaven, return a second time to earth, and physically face to face teach Saul.
That false belief is too problematic.
You say it without understanding it which adds more evidence you have never been discipled nor studied under the anointing and instead get your doctrine from men.

Paul states he received it by revelation from Christ. That is the word of God you refuse to believe.

See above.

Galatians 1:12 (KJV 1900) — 12 For I neither received it of man, neither was I taught it, but by the revelation of Jesus Christ.
You can say what you want, but scripture says something else. So it is you who touts the word of man and it is you who are discordant with Christ's message of love and acceptance

Uh huh. See above.

BTW you assume scrolls and parchment means Old Testament only

Here we go. Extra-biblical sources. Let me guess...the Pearl of Great Price? The New World Translation? Any other pseudepigrapha sources?

“Scrolls” and “parchments” could be Paul’s own notes and records. They could also include portions of OT Scriptures and what later would become NT Scriptures

Obviously you've never been discipled.

Robert W. Yarbrough, The Letters to Timothy and Titus (ed. D. A. Carson; Pillar New Testament Commentary; Grand Rapids, MI; London: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company; Apollos, 2018), 450.

Doctrines of men. Proving my point.

The syntax of the sentence probably indicates that he had also left the other items mentioned, “the scrolls and parchments,” with Carpus. Precisely what writings he had in mind is not entirely clear, because of the range of written materials covered by the terms and because of the grammar of the clause. “Scrolls” (TNIV/NIV; “books,” NRSV) designates a written work in either the form of a scroll (rolls) or a codex (leafs sewn together into something like the modern book) made from papyrus, and could refer to portions of the OT.51 If small codices are meant in this reference, they would have served as notebooks. The second term translated as “parchments” refers to skins prepared for writing.

Philip H. Towner, The Letters to Timothy and Titus (The New International Commentary on the New Testament; Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 2006), 629.

So you deny what Paul states

Galatians 1:12 (KJV 1900) — 12 For I neither received it of man, neither was I taught it, but by the revelation of Jesus Christ.

to affirm what he did not clearly say

Again it is you who denies the word of God

1 John 3:14 (KJV 1900) — 14 We know that we have passed from death unto life, because we love the brethren. He that loveth not his brother abideth in death.

 

[TomL]

That's right: Christ. = "Messias = "Anointing" = Holy Spirit. The same way we today receive our revelation when we read and study Scripture. From the Holy Spirit.
But Jesus did not leave heaven, return a second time to earth, and physically face to face teach Saul.
That false belief is too problematic.
You say it without understanding it which adds more evidence you have never been discipled nor studied under the anointing and instead get your doctrine from men.

See above.

Uh huh. See above.

Here we go. Extra-biblical sources. Let me guess...the Pearl of Great Price? The New World Translation? Any other pseudepigrapha sources?

Obviously you've never been discipled.

Doctrines of men. Proving my point.


View attachment 721

sorry you are simply denying the text

and assuming Jesus could only reveal truth if he were face to face with Paul

that begs the question.

Galatians 1:12 (KJV 1900) — 12 For I neither received it of man, neither was I taught it, but by the revelation of Jesus Christ.
You can say what you want, but scripture says something else. So it is you who touts the word of man and it is you who are discordant with Christ's message of love and acceptance

and you have not shown scrolls and parchment means only Old Testament writing or that is how he got his revelation

that is more question begging and denying what Paul wrote was scripture

Ephesians 2:13–19 (KJV 1900) — 13 But now in Christ Jesus ye who sometimes were far off are made nigh by the blood of Christ. 14 For he is our peace, who hath made both one, and hath broken down the middle wall of partition between us; 15 Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances; for to make in himself of twain one new man, so making peace; 16 And that he might reconcile both unto God in one body by the cross, having slain the enmity thereby: 17 And came and preached peace to you which were afar off, and to them that were nigh. 18 For through him we both have access by one Spirit unto the Father. 19 Now therefore ye are no more strangers and foreigners, but fellowcitizens with the saints, and of the household of God;
Galatians 3:29 (KJV 1900) — 29 And if ye be Christ’s, then are ye Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the promise.

 

[jeremiah1five]

sorry you are simply denying the text

and assuming Jesus could only reveal truth if he were face to face with Paul

that begs the question.

Galatians 1:12 (KJV 1900) — 12 For I neither received it of man, neither was I taught it, but by the revelation of Jesus Christ.
You can say what you want, but scripture says something else. So it is you who touts the word of man and it is you who are discordant with Christ's message of love and acceptance

and you have not shown scrolls and parchment means only Old Testament writing or that is how he got his revelation

that is more question begging and denying what Paul wrote was scripture

Ephesians 2:13–19 (KJV 1900) — 13 But now in Christ Jesus ye who sometimes were far off are made nigh by the blood of Christ. 14 For he is our peace, who hath made both one, and hath broken down the middle wall of partition between us; 15 Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances; for to make in himself of twain one new man, so making peace; 16 And that he might reconcile both unto God in one body by the cross, having slain the enmity thereby: 17 And came and preached peace to you which were afar off, and to them that were nigh. 18 For through him we both have access by one Spirit unto the Father. 19 Now therefore ye are no more strangers and foreigners, but fellowcitizens with the saints, and of the household of God;
Galatians 3:29 (KJV 1900) — 29 And if ye be Christ’s, then are ye Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the promise.

No, Scripture doesn't say "something else." Saul says, "For I neither received it of man, neither was I taught it, but by the revelation of Jesus Christ." It doesn't say BY Jeus Christ. You want to interpret these words by saying Jesus left heaven, returned to earth a second time and taught Saul personally things that were ALREADY in the Old Testament.
I say the revelation was given through study of the Hebrew Scriptures under the anointing of the Holy Spirit. Same thing the Holy Spirit did with me in my walk, and in the walks of other true born, committed believers.

You also confuse "covenant" with "household of God," which is what Gentile proselytes and God-Fearers were already in the household of God being obedient to God's Torah Law. They were citizens with Israel.

 

[TomL]

No, Scripture doesn't say "something else." Saul says, "For I neither received it of man, neither was I taught it, but by the revelation of Jesus Christ." It doesn't say BY Jeus Christ. You want to interpret these words by saying Jesus left heaven, returned to earth a second time and taught Saul personally things that were ALREADY in the Old Testament.
I say the revelation was given through study of the Hebrew Scriptures under the anointing of the Holy Spirit. Same thing the Holy Spirit did with me in my walk, and in the walks of other true born, committed believers.

You also confuse "covenant" with "household of God," which is what Gentile proselytes and God-Fearers were already in the household of God being obedient to God's Torah Law. They were citizens with Israel.

Seriously?

by the revelation of Christ is not by Christ and you imagine that refers to the Old Testament

Paul had sat in no classes, nor had he sat under any Christian teacher. The gospel had been given to him directly by “revelation from Jesus Christ

Grant R. Osborne, Galatians: Verse by Verse (Osborne New Testament Commentaries; Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press, 2017), 32.

1:12b Paul now proceeded to fill in the positive side of the contrast he was making by declaring that his gospel was made known to him “by revelation from Jesus Christ.

Timothy George, Galatians (vol. 30; The New American Commentary; Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1994), 110.

This was another blow to the claims of the Judaizers. Paul had not, he says, learned his gospel in the presumed Christian catechetical schools of Jerusalem. Where then had he learned it? It had come directly through a revelation (apokalypsis, ‘unveiling’) of Jesus Christ, he says.
Is the phrase of Jesus Christ, Iēsou Christou, subjective or objective genitive? Is this a revelation made by Christ to Paul, or a revelation of the true meaning of the Christ made by God to Paul? Perhaps it is better to leave the meaning as ambiguous in the English as it is in the Greek. Of the alternatives, the second seems slightly better, but it need not rule out the first. On the road to Damascus, Paul had received a transforming revelation. The source of all revelation is God; and the content of this revelation was Christ (Acts 9:5).


R. Alan Cole, Galatians: An Introduction and Commentary (vol. 9; Tyndale New Testament Commentaries; Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1989), 85.

revelation of Jesus Christ does not mean from reading the Old Testament scriuptures


sorry but your hatred drives you to desperation

additionally you read proselyte here where it does not appear in the text

Ephesians 2:13–19 (KJV 1900) — 13 But now in Christ Jesus ye who sometimes were far off are made nigh by the blood of Christ. 14 For he is our peace, who hath made both one, and hath broken down the middle wall of partition between us; 15 Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances; for to make in himself of twain one new man, so making peace; 16 And that he might reconcile both unto God in one body by the cross, having slain the enmity thereby: 17 And came and preached peace to you which were afar off, and to them that were nigh. 18 For through him we both have access by one Spirit unto the Father. 19 Now therefore ye are no more strangers and foreigners, but fellowcitizens with the saints, and of the household of God;

it is in Christ they are made one not in proselytization to the Jewish religion

 

[Complete]

Subject Heading:- Is anyone else a Seer?

H7200 - רָאָה - râ'âh - raw-aw'
A primitive root; meaning 'to see',( literally or figuratively)
(in numerous applications, direct and implied, transitively, intransitively and causatively)
Translated:- - advise self, appear, approve, behold, X certainly, consider, discern, (make to) enjoy, have experience, gaze, take heed, X indeed, X joyfully, lo, look (on, one another, one on another, one upon another, out, up, upon), mark, meet, X be near, perceive, present, provide, regard, (have) respect, (fore-, cause to, let) see (-r, -m, one another), shew (self), X sight of others, (e-) spy, stare, X surely, X think, view, visions.
(Total KJV occurrences: 1308)

'(Formerly in Israel, when a man went to inquire of God, he said,
“Come, let us go to the seer,” for today's “prophet” was formerly called a seer.)
(1 Sam. 9:9)

-------------------------------------

* In the instruction given regarding the church which is the Body of Christ, in the prison epistles of Paul, (Eph. Phil. Col. 1 & 2 Tim. Titus and Philemon)
there is no mention of spiritual gifts of any kind: possibly because each member is complete in Christ their Head.

Thank you
In Christ Jesus
Chris

 

[jeremiah1five]

Seriously?
by the revelation of Christ is not by Christ and you imagine that refers to the Old Testament

Paul had sat in no classes, nor had he sat under any Christian teacher. The gospel had been given to him directly by “revelation from Jesus Christ

I just realized something. You're not enlightened nor inspired. This is why your beliefs are based on the theology of men and not of God.
It's incredible that you actually teach in your words by what you believe that Jesus left heaven and returned about four years later after He ascended to teach Paul what was already in the Scripture about the New Covenant. This means Jesus already had a second coming and that the so-called false theology of a rapture is a Third Coming of the Lord Jesus Christ. What kind of crap is that! What Saul experienced was the same experience of the three thousand Jews on Pentecost and how three thousand Jews were enlightened and inspired by their Holy Spirit of Promise, a Holy Spirit Promised to Israel by God. The Holy Spirit of Promise was NEVER promised to Gentiles. Show me Scripture where it says such a thing.
Psst...you won't find it because there's no such promise. It's a Gentile lie, and you are regurgitating a lie.
Look below. You quote men as your authority. I quote Scripture.
I'm not going to post against your authors because they're not members here and can't respond.
With me, either come with the Scripture or don't come at all.

Grant R. Osborne, Galatians: Verse by Verse (Osborne New Testament Commentaries; Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press, 2017), 32.

1:12b Paul now proceeded to fill in the positive side of the contrast he was making by declaring that his gospel was made known to him “by revelation from Jesus Christ.

Timothy George, Galatians (vol. 30; The New American Commentary; Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1994), 110.

This was another blow to the claims of the Judaizers. Paul had not, he says, learned his gospel in the presumed Christian catechetical schools of Jerusalem. Where then had he learned it? It had come directly through a revelation (apokalypsis, ‘unveiling’) of Jesus Christ, he says.
Is the phrase of Jesus Christ, Iēsou Christou, subjective or objective genitive? Is this a revelation made by Christ to Paul, or a revelation of the true meaning of the Christ made by God to Paul? Perhaps it is better to leave the meaning as ambiguous in the English as it is in the Greek. Of the alternatives, the second seems slightly better, but it need not rule out the first. On the road to Damascus, Paul had received a transforming revelation. The source of all revelation is God; and the content of this revelation was Christ (Acts 9:5).


R. Alan Cole, Galatians: An Introduction and Commentary (vol. 9; Tyndale New Testament Commentaries; Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1989), 85.

revelation of Jesus Christ does not mean from reading the Old Testament scriuptures


sorry but your hatred drives you to desperation

additionally you read proselyte here where it does not appear in the text

Ephesians 2:13–19 (KJV 1900) — 13 But now in Christ Jesus ye who sometimes were far off are made nigh by the blood of Christ. 14 For he is our peace, who hath made both one, and hath broken down the middle wall of partition between us; 15 Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances; for to make in himself of twain one new man, so making peace; 16 And that he might reconcile both unto God in one body by the cross, having slain the enmity thereby: 17 And came and preached peace to you which were afar off, and to them that were nigh. 18 For through him we both have access by one Spirit unto the Father. 19 Now therefore ye are no more strangers and foreigners, but fellowcitizens with the saints, and of the household of God;

it is in Christ they are made one not in proselytization to the Jewish religion

Saul received his revelation of Jesus Christ through study of the Old Testament Scriptures under the anointing where the covenants are written and recorded along with the writings of the Hebrew prophets sent to the Hebrew people.
I receive revelation of Jesus Christ the same way as Saul did: under the anointing and through reading and studying the Scripture.
ALL true born biblical Christians do.

 

[charismaticlady]

Subject Heading:- Is anyone else a Seer?

H7200 - רָאָה - râ'âh - raw-aw'
A primitive root; meaning 'to see',( literally or figuratively)
(in numerous applications, direct and implied, transitively, intransitively and causatively)
Translated:- - advise self, appear, approve, behold, X certainly, consider, discern, (make to) enjoy, have experience, gaze, take heed, X indeed, X joyfully, lo, look (on, one another, one on another, one upon another, out, up, upon), mark, meet, X be near, perceive, present, provide, regard, (have) respect, (fore-, cause to, let) see (-r, -m, one another), shew (self), X sight of others, (e-) spy, stare, X surely, X think, view, visions.
(Total KJV occurrences: 1308)

'(Formerly in Israel, when a man went to inquire of God, he said,
“Come, let us go to the seer,” for today's “prophet” was formerly called a seer.)
(1 Sam. 9:9)

-------------------------------------

* In the instruction given regarding the church which is the Body of Christ, in the prison epistles of Paul, (Eph. Phil. Col. 1 & 2 Tim. Titus and Philemon)
there is no mention of spiritual gifts of any kind: possibly because each member is complete in Christ their Head.

Thank you
In Christ Jesus
Chris

How would you describe a "wonder"?

Maybe "seer" is not the correct term. That is what the women at my church called it and as soon as they said that, I asked them what they were talking about. They told me that three of the women could see a bright white aura around Pastor Jim when he was preaching. So I prayed to God that if this was from Him, then to please let me have it also, and as soon as Jim started to preach (and not before during "announcements) it started to happen, and they were right. It was bright white. I had never seen anything like it before. I don't call it an aura as they do because that is a term used by mediums. I use a "glow."

One day recently I had my Bible and one of the papers in it fell out and I picked it up and it was a prophecy given to me back in 2001. This is one of the latter lines: "and that her eyes would be opened by the Spirit of God." I don't "see" anything around anyone sitting around the church, nor on anyone else that is like leading song service, or praying. I think maybe it is found in 1 Corithians 14:29 "Let two or three prophets speak, and let the others judge." I don't know. But I think I tend to think it is part of discerning of spirits, seeing as I visited a church and what I saw could only be demonic. I don't know that pastor, but there is something wrong with him.

 

[jeremiah1five]

There were seers in the Old Testament called prophets, but the word "seer" is not used in the New Testament for prophets. I just heard about this about 5 months ago at church. They said they have three seers in the church. I asked them about it during Sunday School and they said they could all see the glory around our pastor when he is giving the sermon. So I prayed and asked God if this gift is from him I would like it also. I saw nothing around him during his morning prayer, but as soon as he began his sermons a white glow emanated from around his head and shoulders. I had never seen that before. I believe it has to do with testing the spirits and discerning of spirits.

Does anyone else have this gift? Tell me what you've experienced. I did visit a church with a missionary friend of mine, and when the pastor started the sermon a 10 in black billowing cloud was coming out of him. I looked around the church and I don't see anything around anyone else, or even the pastor until he starts preaching.

She desires another person’s gift, like Simon in Acts. OP

She doesn’t know what “discerning the spirits” or “testing the spirits” is. OP.

Visions does not mean one is a prophet and yet her understanding is flawed on this. #3.

Hayford would have known if any of his sheep were so called to be prophets. After that, there is no further involvement by Hayford, which is peculiar. #3.

The word “teacher” doesn’t need to be capitalized thus indicating her elevation of the gift instead of the gift-giver. #3.

God “speaking [to me] frequently” is a deception and unbalanced. God speaks to His people through Scripture and infrequently to a person with His voice and it is not a gift. There is no passage indicating hearing God’s voice is a gift. #3.

She indicates being taught “tongues” by men instead of Scripture #7

Asking God to “teach me everything” (about tongues) and “wipe my mind of men’s doctrines” and then deferring to men and their books for doctrine #7.

Leroy Surface is a Gentile teaching Gentile theology, not the theology of the Scripture which is Hebrew based.

All the gifts of the Spirit are to be exercised “in the house” (of God) but she claims to be given “words of wisdom” and of “knowledge” and of “prophecy” when she is alone.#7

Having immediate conversations with God in question and answer format is problematic. #7

The main reason for going to church is for worship of God, not fellowship. #19.

She believes a person’s “spirit” is born-again. #19.

She doesn’t know that a person who is born again has been judged at the cross and equates a believer being judged further at the “second death.” #26.

Claiming to “know everything the apostles taught” is problematic. #36.

She states things about Hitler that are not true. #37.

You had asked to be anointed with oil. #77.

She teaches Gentiles are grafted into the Olive tree who is Israel and yet there is no passage in Scripture identifying Gentiles as an Olive tree let alone a “wild” Olive tree. #84.

She teaches that the Holy Spirit Promised to Israel is given to Gentiles which violates the Word of God. Nowhere in Scripture is the Holy Spirit promised to Gentiles. #84.

She denies Christ in another believer by “ignoring” that person which is the same as ignoring/denying Christ in that believer and this is antichrist behavior. Can any body part do that against another body part in a physical body? No, they cannot. All body parts are to follow the head and function as that body part is supposed to function so that the whole body operate healthy and sound #89.

She doesn’t understand the Laws written on the heart, which are the Laws of Moses/God. #95.

She says there are two kinds/types of sin which is heresy. There is only one type of sin. #102.

She believes that the “devil” has the power to dispense to believers – if she is a believer – gifts when there is nothing in Scripture that teaches that. And she reject that the angels that sinned are locked up as per Peter and Jude. #106.

Those that God uses He teaches and disciples but there is too much error in her theology. She believes things that are not bible.

She says a Christian dies either righteous or holy which is error. In death we have reached a glorified state in which we are BOTH righteous and holy. #138.

She doesn’t understand the doctrine of sin. And upon this does not understand the sacrifice of Christ and the atonement. #138.

She misunderstands and misapplies Scripture such as seeing constructive criticism or biblical truth as something to be avoided or rejected because truth does not come to her in a way that she believes it should come. He application of Phil. 4: 8 proves a candy-coated “Christian” that can’t handle things like a sword that pierces to the dividing of body, soul, and (human) spirit. #139.

She doesn’t understand the New Covenant, first that it is between God and the House of Israel and Judah, and that the New Covenant is only the Mosaic Covenant fulfilled by Jesus Christ, and from this when a person becomes born again God writes the Mosaic Covenant Laws nailed to Christ’s cross and put in the heart of the believer to be led and guided and taught from within when at one time the Law led and guided and taught Israel from without on stone instead of what’s now fleshly tables of the heart. #142.

She contradicts herself which is another way of saying she’s double minded in that she claims the office of “T”eacher (capital “T” but only Christ is deserving of a capital “T” as Teacher) and then quotes 1 Jn. 2:27 which states we don’t need human teachers to teach us if we have the Holy Spirit thus denying the ministry of teacher described in Eph. 4:11, whose ministry is for the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, and for the edification of the body of Christ so that we do not end up with error and false doctrine. #142.

She states to do “works is against one’s nature” which is incorrect. It is works that originate in the fallen human nature, not against it. #155.

A person who claims all the gifts of the Spirit minus tongues and interpretation of tongues does not know her own spirit nor the doctrine of the Holy Spirit. Not even Saul or any of the Lord’s apostles had all the gifts minus two. You cannot have those gifts minus the two important ones which are the gifts attributed to the mouth in the body and most associated with the seer/prophet and claim to be a seer/prophet. Besides, this, a person who has and does speak in tongues privately or in fellowship is as James said, by the Lord putting a bit in a person’s mouth He can lead that person this way and that and is someone who is submitted to God because of this bit in their mouth. A seer/prophet would be a tongue talker because by being the mouth in the body of Christ tongues and interpretation of tongues is necessary for someone claiming to be a seer/prophet. #165.

In order to “discern the sermon” of a pastor one must know the Scripture and she has too many errors in belief and holds to a great deal of false doctrine. She cannot be have the office of a teacher because a teacher clarifies truth to the body of Christ and having and holding to way too much error disqualifies her of being a teacher. #168.

She doesn’t understand the doctrine of what “demons” are. #168.

She doesn’t know what the bible teaches on the offices and the spiritual gifts in the body of Christ. #172.

For writing a book on tongues she doesn’t know what tongues are and the other spiritual gifts as well as the offices in the body. #174.

She says that tongues is given to everyone who is a Christian which is untrue. #182.

She says that there are gifts that are “higher” and this is not true. More false doctrine and belief. #182.

Stopping at page twelve these things are enough to discredit she is a Teacher (capital “T”) nor is she a seer/prophet. There is too much error, misunderstanding of doctrine on these things, misapplication of Scripture, and she says many wrong things about the One True God. She is deceived and self-deceived, she’s never been discipled, never received any of these spiritual gifts (minus two), and I have brought out these things for her consumption and training and admonition, but because it is not according to her method of how truth is supposed to be disseminated she will not receive these things I say, which she will fly in the face of “let the other prophets judge.”

 

[mikesw]

Paul does not need Old Testament authority. You are begging the question, assuming the New Testament cannot contain new revelation. Paul got his revelation from Christ and is an apostle . You however are not and do not possess the authority he had.

Galatians 1:12 (KJV 1900) — 12 For I neither received it of man, neither was I taught it, but by the revelation of Jesus Christ.

You have not received the personal revelation Paul received and you like Paul once was are fighting against the will of Christ

There are at least 8 people who wrote what became the New Testament. I asked you to cite Saul's authority from the Old Testament where he gets his teaching that Gentiles are or were included in the three Hebrew covenants and you say the New Testament 'says so'? Let me ask you again, Saul will say something in his letters and refer to the Old Testament as support for what he says. So, you say Saul added Gentiles to the Abrahamic Covenant in your quote of his statements in Romans, Galatians, and Ephesians, so tell me, where in the Old Testament supports his statements?

I get my understanding of Scripture from Christ, too. I study under the anointing and given my call and place in the body as well as knowledge of my spiritual gifts Christ opens my mind to receive what He wants me to know in my daily living. There's no difference between me and Saul.

Are you saying what he (Saul) teaches is Scripture, or that he gets his teaching from Scripture (Old Testament?)

13 The cloke that I left at Troas with Carpus, when thou comest, bring with thee, and the books, but especially the parchments. 2 Tim. 4:12–13.

I receive the same 'revelation of Jesus Christ' as Saul did when I read and study scripture. We all do. You seem to imply that Jesus Himself left heaven and sat one-on-one with Saul and taught him all he wrote about, which isn't and wasn't true. Saul was a rabbi and a Pharisee. Part of his service in the Temple and Sanhedrin before his conversion was to know the Hebrew Scriptures of Law, Psalms, and Prophets. His experience with Christ (the Holy Spirit) on the road to Damascus around AD 34-36 was enough to cause him to leave for Arabia and other places to read and study the Hebrew bible in order to understand what happen to him and what these stories and witness of this man Jesus Christ, a man many Jews took as Israel's Messiah, meant. Saul studied the Hebrew Scriptures where Moses wrote about this Prophet God was to send from "among their brethren" and to understand and make sense of the New Covenant era Israel found herself in. He 'disappeared' for 17 years before Barnabas brought him to Antioch to pastor the brethren there. In the meantime, all the revelation he received came from Old Testament study.

So, as rabbi raised up in the rabbinic tradition and a man above 'many his equals' he was perfect choice by God to give such ministry and message to take to the Jews before through their hard hearts led him to first go to Gentile proselytes and God-Fearers and in between them, to minister to other non-aligned Gentiles (and I mean 'non-aligned' as those Gentiles that were enemies of the Jews who became born again as opposed to proselytes and God-Fearers who were committed and allied to Israel under the Law.)

Everything Saul wrote about in his letters came from the Old Testament. Jesus didn't leave heaven and sit with Saul face to face and teach him. Saul received his understanding from doing what we true Christians do under the anointing when we read and study our bibles - given that we have a good translation. But you make it sound as though Jesus sat with Saul and taught him personally which was not the case.

Tom,
You have to listen to this guy. He had a vision of a light and a voice from heaven that disclosed to him a message he cannot share because it is personal to him. This vision places him higher than the New Testament writings and higher than Paul. So even Paul's message falls short of the glory of this guy's insight. So this guy's vision exposes the deceit of the 2000 years that non-Hebrew gentiles have been stuck under all this time. So dearest Tom, he is so sorry to have to tell you that you are not qualified to be a follower of Christ unless you have a mother who is Jewish and you have at least 25% Israel bloodline. So remember with whom you are confronting in this exchange of dialogue. Oh wait. If you have had a higher vision and have interacted face-to-face with Jesus, maybe you too qualify with this guy to participate in the discussion you have been doing.
Glad I could clarify this for you so you would not make any more grave errors.

 

[mikesw]

How would you describe a "wonder"?

Maybe "seer" is not the correct term. That is what the women at my church called it and as soon as they said that, I asked them what they were talking about. They told me that three of the women could see a bright white aura around Pastor Jim when he was preaching. So I prayed to God that if this was from Him, then to please let me have it also, and as soon as Jim started to preach (and not before during "announcements) it started to happen, and they were right. It was bright white. I had never seen anything like it before. I don't call it an aura as they do because that is a term used by mediums. I use a "glow."

One day recently I had my Bible and one of the papers in it fell out and I picked it up and it was a prophecy given to me back in 2001. This is one of the latter lines: "and that her eyes would be opened by the Spirit of God." I don't "see" anything around anyone sitting around the church, nor on anyone else that is like leading song service, or praying. I think maybe it is found in 1 Corithians 14:29 "Let two or three prophets speak, and let the others judge." I don't know. But I think I tend to think it is part of discerning of spirits, seeing as I visited a church and what I saw could only be demonic. I don't know that pastor, but there is something wrong with him.

I would suggest running from this church group. This viewing of auras is not something described in scripture nor is something that could be called a gift to share with the body since there is no way for anyone to benefit from this privately detected phenomenon. Even if this were some discernment, that would mean everyone else there was not a "proper" Christian and thus you would still need to run from there since you would be outnumbered.
We also see this guy responding to you who claims a vision that makes him better equipped to write the New Testament than Paul. So he says to disregard what Paul says and follow him and this special vision. But anyone who has an ounce of understanding of God and scripture knows not to neglect scripture when someone else tries to make a higher claim.

 

[mikesw]

As a general contribution to the main topic, I allow the possibility that God does work with signs and wonders in the world today. This mainly seems to happen in areas that are less penetrated with the gospel. These still could happen in the American and European countries where God seems fit to apply these. However, these signs, gifts, and wonders should essentially follow the whole of scriptures, especially the New Testament. When speaking of gifts, the idea is more about something you appear to get from God that functions as a gift to the body of believers. If the idea is not found in scripture, you better be very careful if considering practicing that. I am mostly fine with claims of people's encounters with angels inasmuch as it was a positive experience and only is shared to recognize God working in those who follow Christ.

 

[jeremiah1five]

Tom,
You have to listen to this guy. He had a vision of a light and a voice from heaven that disclosed to him a message he cannot share because it is personal to him. This vision places him higher than the New Testament writings and higher than Paul. So even Paul's message falls short of the glory of this guy's insight. So this guy's vision exposes the deceit of the 2000 years that non-Hebrew gentiles have been stuck under all this time. So dearest Tom, he is so sorry to have to tell you that you are not qualified to be a follower of Christ unless you have a mother who is Jewish and you have at least 25% Israel bloodline. So remember with whom you are confronting in this exchange of dialogue. Oh wait. If you have had a higher vision and have interacted face-to-face with Jesus, maybe you too qualify with this guy to participate in the discussion you have been doing.
Glad I could clarify this for you so you would not make any more grave errors.

This little light of mine, I'm gonna let it shine.
Let it shine, let it shine, let it shine.

4 But when the fulness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, made under the law,
5 To redeem them that were under the law, that we might receive the adoption of sons. Gal. 4:3–5.

Case closed. All Israel shall be saved!

 

[mikesw]

This little light of mine, I'm gonna let it shine.
Let it shine, let it shine, let it shine.

4 But when the fulness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, made under the law,
5 To redeem them that were under the law, that we might receive the adoption of sons. Gal. 4:3–5.

Case closed. All Israel shall be saved!

rinse and repeat ad nauseum without advancing to a substantial argument. No matter how many times you repeat a misconception, it does not become a good argument. Hopefully you can break out of that cycle. It hardly makes sense for you to quote something from Rom 11:26-27 when you deny the authority of Paul's writings over you.
Work on proving your acceptance of all that Paul wrote. This will help you establish some credibility. After that, figure out what Paul is saying by reviewing the commentaries. Start developing arguments after that.

 

[TomL]

Tom,
You have to listen to this guy. He had a vision of a light and a voice from heaven that disclosed to him a message he cannot share because it is personal to him. This vision places him higher than the New Testament writings and higher than Paul. So even Paul's message falls short of the glory of this guy's insight. So this guy's vision exposes the deceit of the 2000 years that non-Hebrew gentiles have been stuck under all this time. So dearest Tom, he is so sorry to have to tell you that you are not qualified to be a follower of Christ unless you have a mother who is Jewish and you have at least 25% Israel bloodline. So remember with whom you are confronting in this exchange of dialogue. Oh wait. If you have had a higher vision and have interacted face-to-face with Jesus, maybe you too qualify with this guy to participate in the discussion you have been doing.
Glad I could clarify this for you so you would not make any more grave errors.

Sounds like a personal issue.

 

[Complete]

How would you describe a "wonder"?

Maybe "seer" is not the correct term. That is what the women at my church called it and as soon as they said that, I asked them what they were talking about. They told me that three of the women could see a bright white aura around Pastor Jim when he was preaching. So I prayed to God that if this was from Him, then to please let me have it also, and as soon as Jim started to preach (and not before during "announcements) it started to happen, and they were right. It was bright white. I had never seen anything like it before. I don't call it an aura as they do because that is a term used by mediums. I use a "glow."

One day recently I had my Bible and one of the papers in it fell out and I picked it up and it was a prophecy given to me back in 2001. This is one of the latter lines: "and that her eyes would be opened by the Spirit of God." I don't "see" anything around anyone sitting around the church, nor on anyone else that is like leading song service, or praying. I think maybe it is found in 1 Corinthians 14:29 "Let two or three prophets speak, and let the others judge." I don't know. But I think I tend to think it is part of discerning of spirits, seeing as I visited a church and what I saw could only be demonic. I don't know that pastor, but there is something wrong with him.

How would you describe a "wonder"?

H4159 - môphêth môphêth - mo-faith', mo-faith'
From H3302 in the sense of conspicuousness; a miracle; by implication a token or omen
Translated: - miracle, sign, wonder (-ed at).
Usage eg., :- Deut 13:1-2; 28:46; 2 Chron. 32:31; Isa. 20:3.
----------------
H6381 - pâlâ - paw-law'
A primitive root; properly perhaps to separate, that is, distinguish (literally or figuratively);
by implication to be (causatively make) great, difficult, wonderful.
Translated: - accomplish, (arise . . . too, be too) hard, hidden, things too high, (be, do, do a, shew) marvelous (-ly, -els, things, work),
miracles, perform, separate, make singular, (be, great, make) wonderful (-ers, -ly, things, works), wondrous (things, works, -ly).
Usage eg., :- Exo. 3:20, 4:21
-----------------
G5059 - teras - ter'-as
Of uncertain affinity; a prodigy or omen.
Translated:- wonder
Usage eg., :- Cor. 12:12; Heb. 2:4
------------------

Hello @charismaticlady,

Biblically a wonder would appear to be something which causes you to 'wonder' and to ask 'why?', and seek to know the meaning of it, it is of God and is intended to produce that sense of wonderment and enquiry.

Thank you for this further description of the experience you have had.

Within the love of Christ our Saviour,
our Lord and Head.
Chris

 

[TomL]

This little light of mine, I'm gonna let it shine.
Let it shine, let it shine, let it shine.

4 But when the fulness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, made under the law,
5 To redeem them that were under the law, that we might receive the adoption of sons. Gal. 4:3–5.

Case closed. All Israel shall be saved!

Romans 9:6 (KJV 1900) — 6 Not as though the word of God hath taken none effect. For they are not all Israel, which are of Israel:

Romans 9:27–29 (KJV 1900) — 27 Esaias also crieth concerning Israel, Though the number of the children of Israel be as the sand of the sea, a remnant shall be saved: 28 For he will finish the work, and cut it short in righteousness: because a short work will the Lord make upon the earth. 29 And as Esaias said before, Except the Lord of Sabaoth had left us a seed, we had been as Sodoma, and been made like unto Gomorrha.

We know all under the law were not saved