RIDICULOUS CHRISTIAN CLAIMS AND SHAMING JESUS
- Thread starter sparkman
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
Yes, usually they are things like lengthening one leg...obviously something that can be replicated by shifting the position of the hips...or headaches or something that is psychosomatic or just plain lies.
But, as I've said, I don't deny that God still provides and does miracles for his children...it's the charismatic nonsense that shame Christ...the spiritual ninja, demon buster, clown show stuff. I am much more inclined to believe someone who tells me their congregation and/or elders prayed for a healing of a member and it happened...in fact I don't doubt those claims in general.
But, as I've said, I don't deny that God still provides and does miracles for his children...it's the charismatic nonsense that shame Christ...the spiritual ninja, demon buster, clown show stuff. I am much more inclined to believe someone who tells me their congregation and/or elders prayed for a healing of a member and it happened...in fact I don't doubt those claims in general.
Here's another appropriate one. I'm waiting for that threat to be issued to me. One of the chat room charismatics said that God kills her enemies, and gave an example of a man who died within a short time after making a comment about her.
Since I don't fear death, it's an empty threat.
By the way I should say that some of my friends consider themselves charismatics but they are not like her at all and consider her in the same light that I do.
Since I don't fear death, it's an empty threat.
By the way I should say that some of my friends consider themselves charismatics but they are not like her at all and consider her in the same light that I do.
Attachments
Last edited:
There's a time & method to shame some people for their sin.
1Corinthians 6:
1When one of you has a complaint against another, does he dare to take the matter before those who are unrighteous and not before the saints? 2You know that the saints will rule the world, don’t you? And if the world is going to be ruled by you, can’t you handle insignificant cases? 3You know that we will rule angels, not to mention things in this life, don’t you? 4So if you have cases dealing with this life, why do you appoint as judges people who have no standing in the church? 5I say this to make you feel ashamed. Has it come to this, that there is not one person among you who is wise enough to settle disagreements between brothers?a6Instead, one brother goes to court against another brother, and before unbelieving judges,b at that! 7The very fact that you have lawsuits among yourselves is already a defeat for you. Why not rather just accept the wrong? Why not rather be cheated? 8Instead, you yourselves practice doing wrong and cheating others, and brothers at that!
Paul didn't say things to "make them feel ashamed". He said these things because of it is a shame because of their behavior being manifested among them.
He is taking about shameful behavior such as malice, causing divisions and strife , slandering others in the body of Christ.
In the previous chapters, Paul said some very stern things to these Corinthians, but he made it clear that he was not saying these things to shame them (see 1 Corinthians 4:14).
1 Corinthians 6:5-6 (NASB)
[SUP]5 [/SUP] I say this to your shame. Is it so, that there is not among you one wise man who will be able to decide between his brethren
,
[SUP]6 [/SUP] but brother goes to law with brother, and that before unbelievers?
He is taking about shameful behavior such as malice, causing divisions and strife , slandering others in the body of Christ.
In the previous chapters, Paul said some very stern things to these Corinthians, but he made it clear that he was not saying these things to shame them (see 1 Corinthians 4:14).
1 Corinthians 6:5-6 (NASB)
[SUP]5 [/SUP] I say this to your shame. Is it so, that there is not among you one wise man who will be able to decide between his brethren
,
[SUP]6 [/SUP] but brother goes to law with brother, and that before unbelievers?
My view on confrontation is that if the person continually manifests the same behavior over a long period of time, and it is a public issue affecting multiple people, or if the behavior involves multiple people, addressing it openly is an appropriate response.
If I thought that a particular individual who was not making public statements had an issue with me, I would talk to them privately.
Personality plays a role, as well. If the person manifests a dominant, aggressive behavior toward others, it's unlikely personal correction is going anywhere. All that's going to happen is the person is going to tell you it's none of your business.
The issues I've brought up are behaviors manifested by multiple people, although a few have manifested it worse than others.
If I thought that a particular individual who was not making public statements had an issue with me, I would talk to them privately.
Personality plays a role, as well. If the person manifests a dominant, aggressive behavior toward others, it's unlikely personal correction is going anywhere. All that's going to happen is the person is going to tell you it's none of your business.
The issues I've brought up are behaviors manifested by multiple people, although a few have manifested it worse than others.
Last edited:
I do not think this post is about non-charismatics versus charismatics/pentecostals!
It is about having discernment and using wisdom. That means comparing things to the Bible correctly. I'm still appalled at the cat example. But worse than the woman saying it, is that over and over people are saying,
"Well, the donkey talked to Balaam, so I wouldn't rule out the cat talking to the woman."
First thing, Balaam was a pagan, involved in divination and other magic arts, and he was a false prophet.(After the style of Pharaoh's magicians, perhaps?) So the donkey was talking to a pagan, not a believer. Second, the situation was one of repeated disobedience. The donkey spoke words to stop Balaam from being killed, and himself. The poor donkey had already tried to stop Balaam from going forward. Balaam was on the way to the king of Moab.(Numbers 22:21-35)
Why was he going to Moab to talk to the king? Well, in order to curse the Israelites, so they would not invade the King's territories. This was important, because God had chosen the Israelities as his chosen people, through whom the Messiah would come. No Israel, no Jesus Christ! Balaam was not a prophet of God, but the exact opposite. He was there to destroy Israel.
So, because there is only ONE incident where an animal talked in the Bible, we must consider it to be an exceptional circumstance, and certainly not the norm. And there was a definite purpose - save Israel. The real one, not the Israel people make up in their minds.
Then, there are the NT quotes on Balaam and his donkey:
"By forsaking the right path they have gone astray, because they followed the way of Balaam son of Bosor, who loved the wages of unrighteousness, 16 yet was rebuked for his own transgression (a dumb donkey, speaking with a human voice, restrained the prophet’s madness)." 2 Peter 2:15-16
So not only was Balaam a false prophet, he was in it for the money. (Shades of the 20th and 21st centuries!)
"Woe to them! For they walked in the way of Cain and abandoned themselves for the sake of gain to Balaam's error and perished in Korah's rebellion." Jude 1:11
So Balaam is pronounced as evil as Cain, the first murderer, and to Korah and his fellow rebels, who were swallowed up into the earth. Not a nice picture. But if you are saying an animal spoke to you in human language, it means you are identifying with Balaam and his evil works and practices!
This is the ONLY example where an animal spoke, right? I hope everyone agrees with that! (If you do not agree, then feel free to post the other verses that speak directly to the issue of dumb animals speaking to humans.
Once you have established this donkey speeching to Balaam was the only example in the Bible, then next you have to consider what was going on. The donkey was NOT speaking to Balaam to give him a word of encouragement or healing, or life guidance. He was speaking because he saw the flaming swords in the angels' hands. And God did give him the ability to speak. No doubt about it.
So that pattern is God gives an animal speech to stop his people from being cursed and destroyed by a black magician only in it for the money.
The logic is therefore, (because this donkey is the only time in the entire Bible an animal spoke!) if an animal is speaking to you, it is because you are an evil and wicked person, out to destroy God's people, which in the OT also meant destroying the chosen seed of the Messiah.
The next time someone tells you an animal spoke to them, ask them the following questions:
1. Are you a wicked and evil magician like Balaam?
2. Are you out to totally destroy God's people?
There can be no other conclusion, with one example. Which brings us back to hermeneutics - You can NOT make a doctrine out of something that only appears in the bible ONCE. Because then, lke the woman with the cat in the chat rooms, you are taking a single incident that happened at least 3000 or more years ago, projecting it forward to now, and applying it to every strange and bizarre tale the mentally ill, or probably more correctly, those seeking attention from the drama, can come up with.
"Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God, for many false prophets have gone out into the world." 1 John 4:1
We need to test first! Why? Because once you have accepted something as truth, it will be so much harder to change what you have written, even if you take the time to actually look deeper into the matter. It shocks me the lack of discernment I see here. So many people who call themselves scholars or seekers after the truth, accepting this cat speech as probable, instead of thinking about the implications of trying to replicate what happened in the Bible. If you do not have discernment, the Bible points out you are not spiritually mature!
"But solid food is for the mature, for those who have their powers of discernment trained by constant practice to distinguish good from evil." Hebrews 5:14
But then, seeing the people here who are saying it could have happened, most of them are trapped in cults and heresies already. They won't use common sense, let alone Biblical assessment in their theology, so why wouldn't they fall prey to a woman like this, when they have already fallen prey to other nonsense?
As for whether saying that the cat did NOT talk to the woman, and being anti-charismatic, that again is another twisted lie. There are Pentecostals on this thread, and they did not fall for this. In fact, because of the nature of prophecy and interpretation which happens frequently in their churches, they really have to have twice the discernment that a non-charismatic would have. They need to be able to discern whether a prophecy is of God, or the devil. Because the devil will sneak in anywhere he can!
What I have seen by some people on this thread, is that they are trying to make this into a defense of the charismatic gifts, which has nothing to do with a cat speaking to a woman and what happened to Balaam's donkey. The people who are on the charismatic side, but are discerning and know their Bibles have come out against this rampantly evil use of the gifts, which is how it should be. No one should be given a free pass just because they SAY God gave them a word. Again, discernment has to be the key to anything like this. Whether cat speaking to a woman, mistranslating the Greek or Hebrew, pulling verses out of context, or prophecies that cannot possibly be from God, we need to stand against this misuse of the gifts, together. There is not a possiblity that the woman in the chat rooms heard from her cat as she said in the chat rooms! (Ok, meow, since she has changed her story, but God does not give the gift of interpretation to people who can't figure out what their cat is saying, when it says "Meow!" My beloved cat of 13 years, who just passed away from cancer last month, spoke to me all the time! Things like "my bowl is empty of food." And on trips in the car, "bathroom, now!")
And if you are wondering, I used to believe the gifts had died, in response to seeing these very same kind of excesses in my pentecostal days. I am now in a Baptist church that is about as close as you can get to charismatic, without actually being charismatic! We do have some of the gifts, operating, and I believe they are totally from God. We have one man who prophesies on occasion. He gets permission from the pastor or worship leader, then comes up, with his Bible, and reads a passage. He then says, he believes God is speaking to someone about the words in the passage. And he has always been right! These are usually passages of encouragement, but I am sure if God told him to read something to bring someone to repentance, he would read it.
When someone has God lay on their hearts a passage to read to the congregation, you cannot go wrong. As for all this made up stuff, people, wake up and stop thinking you have to believe lies in order to defend your position in the charismatic debate.
"See to it that no one takes you captive by philosophy and empty deceit, according to human tradition, according to the elemental spirits of the world, and not according to Christ." Col. 2:8
It is about having discernment and using wisdom. That means comparing things to the Bible correctly. I'm still appalled at the cat example. But worse than the woman saying it, is that over and over people are saying,
"Well, the donkey talked to Balaam, so I wouldn't rule out the cat talking to the woman."
First thing, Balaam was a pagan, involved in divination and other magic arts, and he was a false prophet.(After the style of Pharaoh's magicians, perhaps?) So the donkey was talking to a pagan, not a believer. Second, the situation was one of repeated disobedience. The donkey spoke words to stop Balaam from being killed, and himself. The poor donkey had already tried to stop Balaam from going forward. Balaam was on the way to the king of Moab.(Numbers 22:21-35)
Why was he going to Moab to talk to the king? Well, in order to curse the Israelites, so they would not invade the King's territories. This was important, because God had chosen the Israelities as his chosen people, through whom the Messiah would come. No Israel, no Jesus Christ! Balaam was not a prophet of God, but the exact opposite. He was there to destroy Israel.
So, because there is only ONE incident where an animal talked in the Bible, we must consider it to be an exceptional circumstance, and certainly not the norm. And there was a definite purpose - save Israel. The real one, not the Israel people make up in their minds.
Then, there are the NT quotes on Balaam and his donkey:
"By forsaking the right path they have gone astray, because they followed the way of Balaam son of Bosor, who loved the wages of unrighteousness, 16 yet was rebuked for his own transgression (a dumb donkey, speaking with a human voice, restrained the prophet’s madness)." 2 Peter 2:15-16
So not only was Balaam a false prophet, he was in it for the money. (Shades of the 20th and 21st centuries!)
"Woe to them! For they walked in the way of Cain and abandoned themselves for the sake of gain to Balaam's error and perished in Korah's rebellion." Jude 1:11
So Balaam is pronounced as evil as Cain, the first murderer, and to Korah and his fellow rebels, who were swallowed up into the earth. Not a nice picture. But if you are saying an animal spoke to you in human language, it means you are identifying with Balaam and his evil works and practices!
This is the ONLY example where an animal spoke, right? I hope everyone agrees with that! (If you do not agree, then feel free to post the other verses that speak directly to the issue of dumb animals speaking to humans.
Once you have established this donkey speeching to Balaam was the only example in the Bible, then next you have to consider what was going on. The donkey was NOT speaking to Balaam to give him a word of encouragement or healing, or life guidance. He was speaking because he saw the flaming swords in the angels' hands. And God did give him the ability to speak. No doubt about it.
So that pattern is God gives an animal speech to stop his people from being cursed and destroyed by a black magician only in it for the money.
The logic is therefore, (because this donkey is the only time in the entire Bible an animal spoke!) if an animal is speaking to you, it is because you are an evil and wicked person, out to destroy God's people, which in the OT also meant destroying the chosen seed of the Messiah.
The next time someone tells you an animal spoke to them, ask them the following questions:
1. Are you a wicked and evil magician like Balaam?
2. Are you out to totally destroy God's people?
There can be no other conclusion, with one example. Which brings us back to hermeneutics - You can NOT make a doctrine out of something that only appears in the bible ONCE. Because then, lke the woman with the cat in the chat rooms, you are taking a single incident that happened at least 3000 or more years ago, projecting it forward to now, and applying it to every strange and bizarre tale the mentally ill, or probably more correctly, those seeking attention from the drama, can come up with.
"Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God, for many false prophets have gone out into the world." 1 John 4:1
We need to test first! Why? Because once you have accepted something as truth, it will be so much harder to change what you have written, even if you take the time to actually look deeper into the matter. It shocks me the lack of discernment I see here. So many people who call themselves scholars or seekers after the truth, accepting this cat speech as probable, instead of thinking about the implications of trying to replicate what happened in the Bible. If you do not have discernment, the Bible points out you are not spiritually mature!
"But solid food is for the mature, for those who have their powers of discernment trained by constant practice to distinguish good from evil." Hebrews 5:14
But then, seeing the people here who are saying it could have happened, most of them are trapped in cults and heresies already. They won't use common sense, let alone Biblical assessment in their theology, so why wouldn't they fall prey to a woman like this, when they have already fallen prey to other nonsense?
As for whether saying that the cat did NOT talk to the woman, and being anti-charismatic, that again is another twisted lie. There are Pentecostals on this thread, and they did not fall for this. In fact, because of the nature of prophecy and interpretation which happens frequently in their churches, they really have to have twice the discernment that a non-charismatic would have. They need to be able to discern whether a prophecy is of God, or the devil. Because the devil will sneak in anywhere he can!
What I have seen by some people on this thread, is that they are trying to make this into a defense of the charismatic gifts, which has nothing to do with a cat speaking to a woman and what happened to Balaam's donkey. The people who are on the charismatic side, but are discerning and know their Bibles have come out against this rampantly evil use of the gifts, which is how it should be. No one should be given a free pass just because they SAY God gave them a word. Again, discernment has to be the key to anything like this. Whether cat speaking to a woman, mistranslating the Greek or Hebrew, pulling verses out of context, or prophecies that cannot possibly be from God, we need to stand against this misuse of the gifts, together. There is not a possiblity that the woman in the chat rooms heard from her cat as she said in the chat rooms! (Ok, meow, since she has changed her story, but God does not give the gift of interpretation to people who can't figure out what their cat is saying, when it says "Meow!" My beloved cat of 13 years, who just passed away from cancer last month, spoke to me all the time! Things like "my bowl is empty of food." And on trips in the car, "bathroom, now!")
And if you are wondering, I used to believe the gifts had died, in response to seeing these very same kind of excesses in my pentecostal days. I am now in a Baptist church that is about as close as you can get to charismatic, without actually being charismatic! We do have some of the gifts, operating, and I believe they are totally from God. We have one man who prophesies on occasion. He gets permission from the pastor or worship leader, then comes up, with his Bible, and reads a passage. He then says, he believes God is speaking to someone about the words in the passage. And he has always been right! These are usually passages of encouragement, but I am sure if God told him to read something to bring someone to repentance, he would read it.
When someone has God lay on their hearts a passage to read to the congregation, you cannot go wrong. As for all this made up stuff, people, wake up and stop thinking you have to believe lies in order to defend your position in the charismatic debate.
"See to it that no one takes you captive by philosophy and empty deceit, according to human tradition, according to the elemental spirits of the world, and not according to Christ." Col. 2:8
Last edited:
Another one from my past chats..
One charismatic fellow from the UK told us about his friend who would walk up to total strangers that he sensed had a demon.
Supposedly, in his theology, if the exorcist knows the demon's name, the demon must leave.
He would whisper the name of the demon in the stranger's ear ( I suppose "God" allegedly gave him the name of the demon).
He said that the stranger would smile, which is evidence that the demon had left.
Now, was he smiling because a loon whispered a strange name in his ear, or because a demon had left? I think the truth is obvious.
He probably got this from Christ asking the demons which inhabited a man their name. The demons replied "Legion". I am guessing Christ didn't need to know the name of the demons to cast them out....but he asked for a specific purpose. It's funny how the Christian equivalent of witch doctors arrive at their practices.
One charismatic fellow from the UK told us about his friend who would walk up to total strangers that he sensed had a demon.
Supposedly, in his theology, if the exorcist knows the demon's name, the demon must leave.
He would whisper the name of the demon in the stranger's ear ( I suppose "God" allegedly gave him the name of the demon).
He said that the stranger would smile, which is evidence that the demon had left.
Now, was he smiling because a loon whispered a strange name in his ear, or because a demon had left? I think the truth is obvious.
He probably got this from Christ asking the demons which inhabited a man their name. The demons replied "Legion". I am guessing Christ didn't need to know the name of the demons to cast them out....but he asked for a specific purpose. It's funny how the Christian equivalent of witch doctors arrive at their practices.
Attachments
Excellent explanation, Angela..I'd also add that I think it was an insult to Balaam that God used a donkey to talk to him...if he was a legitimate prophet he would have communicated through an angel or directly.
I would also reiterate that charismatic friends of mine have expressed their disagreement with the weirder claims that I've listed. I brought them up in the past for reasons why I would not be a charismatic , and they have countered in saying that they certainly don't agree with those kinds of weird claims either. They realize their own camp creates a lot of justifiable suspicion through the wild claims.
OK..call it public admonishment. The letter to the Corinthians was public, addressed to a group of people publicly.
I have been called a Pharisee more than once by the individual publicly, so I have no issue with addressing what has occurred regarding foolish claims publicly.
By the way, I am not a Pharisee. I believe that obedience and good works follow salvation, but they are never perfect. I am definitely not in the Free Grace or easy-believism camp, though. If people call believing that obedience and good works follow salvation being a Pharisee, fine. There are plenty of Scriptures that state those who are saved need to pursue holiness, and that there are false believers who are turning the grace of God into lasciviousness.
I have been called a Pharisee more than once by the individual publicly, so I have no issue with addressing what has occurred regarding foolish claims publicly.
By the way, I am not a Pharisee. I believe that obedience and good works follow salvation, but they are never perfect. I am definitely not in the Free Grace or easy-believism camp, though. If people call believing that obedience and good works follow salvation being a Pharisee, fine. There are plenty of Scriptures that state those who are saved need to pursue holiness, and that there are false believers who are turning the grace of God into lasciviousness.
