[metmom]

Would you also agree that God as each of us at different levels of growth and understanding and that excoriating of belittling others who see differently may be counter to what God has prepared that person for?

Since Quix weaseled out of answering that one, how about this?

Would you also agree that God has each of us at different levels of growth and understanding and that excoriating of belittling others who see differently makes you a respecter of person's who is making value judgements about others based on outward appearances instead of the heart as God sees?

And that individual believers answer to God and God alone for their walk with HIM, as in Romans 14? Or that the person being excoriated may not be READY to hear what they are being shredded for or have the maturity to handle that kind of unChristlike criticism properly?

Somehow I don't see that asking people to exercise some discernment and apply Biblical principles and use caution in spiritual matters is demonic, unbiblical, or rock throwing.

I think the church would be far better off being a little more conservative and skeptical before blindly accepting everything that comes down the pike just because someone else claims it's from God. Only the gullible and naive would believe everything they hear without exercising enough discernment to check it out.

[Quix]

Would you also agree that God has each of us at different levels of growth and understanding and that excoriating of belittling others who see differently makes you a respecter of person's who is making value judgements about others based on outward appearances instead of the heart as God sees?

And that individual believers answer to God and God alone for their walk with HIM, as in Romans 14? Or that the person being excoriated may not be READY to hear what they are being shredded for or have the maturity to handle that kind of unChristlike criticism properly?

Ohhhhhhhhh perhaps like the tongues speakers and other Pentecostals y'all's hostilities are so fiercely directed at?

What a classic double standard!

[Quix]

IF y'all cannot detect vigorous classic rock throwing in the bulk of the posts on this thread on y'all's side, then I'm aghast and the poor level of reality testing involved.

If y'all can't conceive that satan and his legions of demons are NOT involved in convincing folks that Holy Spirit took a vacation at the end of Revelation . . . then I have no idea what you think he and his fallen angels and demons do 24/7.

Sit around playing hearts?

When St Paul talks quite plainly in I Cor 14 about PRAYING IN TONGUES . . . that his intellect doesn't understand and God only understands . . . and y'all refuse to realize that denying Paul's statements on such scores as even being there where they plainly are . . . how else can an observant person label such a position than

UNBIBLICAL?

[boatbums]

I think the church would be far better off being a little more conservative and skeptical before blindly accepting everything that comes down the pike just because someone else claims it's from God. Only the gullible and naive would believe everything they hear without exercising enough discernment to check it out.

Wholeheartedly agree! There is a gift of discernment, too, that far too few people exercise. I've been reading this really good article, while waiting for FR to come back online, and it speaks about this exact problem in the church today as well as the link to "Ecumenicalism" and the One World Religion that will come about because people do not know God's word. It is http://www.rapidnet.com/~jbeard/bdm/Psychology/holylaugh.htm and it starts out speaking about the "Holy Laughter" phenomenon tying it into the Charismatic movement and the putting down of people for not diving head first into any supposed movement of the Holy Spirit or for questioning those who lead others into it. One section states:

What we are witnessing in new evangelicalism and the charismatic movement is a subjective approach to God's Word. If something seems to work, it is accepted even if it cannot be validated by Scripture. Since it cannot be validated, it is assumed to be a new work of God. Those who reject it on the basis of its unbiblical or extra-Biblical character are regarded as faithless when, in fact, they are faithless toward the subjective religious philosophy of the "new thing" -- not toward God.

This subjectivity is necessary if Satan is going to meld humanity into a one-world religion. As the masses open themselves up to beliefs and practices that are not validated by Scripture, they leave themselves open to deception of the highest order, often presented in the name of Jesus.

The first step toward melding Christians into the New Age religion is not dissimilar to brianwashing techniques. The "yes set" is to get us to agree that all denominations share a common belief system. This is the motivating force behind the ecumenical movement sponsored by the Vatican and the major players in new evangelicalism and the charismatic movement.

The "truisms" will be that we also share common beliefs and values with aberrant Christian cults and monotheistic religions such as cabalistic Judaism and Islam.

The "suggestion" will be that we have a common spiritual bond with all of mankind. This suggestion will be implemented through the observation of signs and wonders construed to be of God. And if God can honor the faith of non-Christians, who are we to dissent from unity with them?

We can expect the holy laughter people to defend their practices as being of God, while these other practices are counterfeits. But holy laughter as we know it today came lately. All attempts to link it to Scripture or early revival history are without merit. Its real precedent is coincidental to New Age philosophy. Does God mimic something Satan originates? Or is He taken off guard by Satan? I think not. Else He would be guilty of causing confusion among His people. And God is not the author of confusion. (1 Cor. 14:33).