• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Charismatics Are At War With Each Other Over Failed Prophecies Of Trump Victory

A Vestigial Mote

Well-Known Member
From the article:
The article said:
"To my great heartache, I’m convinced parts of the prophetic/charismatic movement are far SICKER than I could have ever dreamed of. I truthfully never realized how absolutely triggered and ballistic thousands and thousands of saints get about Donald Trump."
So many of these people are completely blind. Obviously anyone who believed these "prophets" outright was not in the best frame of mind. The ignorance at play here is just amazing.
 
Last edited:

sun rise

The world is on fire
Premium Member
We also had Qanon and other secularist terrorists groups who went all-in on Trump. The same kind of thing is going on now at least with Qanon so I would not blame religion.

Rather the psychological tendency to worship an extremely flawed authoritarian and endow that figure with messianic significance needs to be addressed globally.
 

A Vestigial Mote

Well-Known Member
We also had Qanon and other secularist terrorists groups who went all-in on Trump. The same kind of thing is going on now at least with Qanon so I would not blame religion.

Rather the psychological tendency to worship an extremely flawed authoritarian and endow that figure with messianic significance needs to be addressed globally.
But we can certainly start with criticizing and letting know our displeasure with those who have actually been caught red-handed displaying that psychological aspect. if they happen to be Christians, so be it.
 

Audie

Veteran Member
From the article:

So many of these people are completely blind. Obviously anyone who believed these "prophets" outright was not in the best frame of mind. The ignorance at play here is just amazing.

Its good that Obama was not one to
exploit the worship that many of his
followers so clearly displayed.

The USA does well to keep religion and
politics apart.
 

A Vestigial Mote

Well-Known Member
Its good that Obama was not one to
exploit the worship that many of his
followers so clearly displayed.

The USA does well to keep religion and
politics apart.
No one should ever listen to anything any "prophet" has to say on anything. Unless the "prophet" can somehow demonstrate that they are receiving the information somehow from completely legitimate and verifiable sources. Outside of that, they should be brushed aside by anyone and everyone. Even if something they say ends up turning out to be correct!

And I don't care who the person is - Obama, Trump, Joel Osteen, Tony Robbins, Oprah Winfrey, Tom Cruise - no one is deserving of "worship." Not one among us. Those that go to such lengths over a person I consider to be working from an unstable state of mind.
 

Wandering Monk

Well-Known Member
It seems like most of these prophet are projecting their desires into the mouth of God; so in a sense God becomes a prophet of the preacher.
 

Redemptionsong

Well-Known Member
No one should ever listen to anything any "prophet" has to say on anything. Unless the "prophet" can somehow demonstrate that they are receiving the information somehow from completely legitimate and verifiable sources. Outside of that, they should be brushed aside by anyone and everyone. Even if something they say ends up turning out to be correct!

And I don't care who the person is - Obama, Trump, Joel Osteen, Tony Robbins, Oprah Winfrey, Tom Cruise - no one is deserving of "worship." Not one among us. Those that go to such lengths over a person I consider to be working from an unstable state of mind.

Do you really think it helps to stick your fingers in your ears? How can you prove that God is/isn't speaking? The real qualification for any prophet of God is righteousness. A righteous, humble, man (or woman) will speak the words of God in truth.

A prophet of God is good at listening to the heart; not just the heart of an individual, but the heart of a nation.

I would also say that a good scientist listens to nature, and is able to predict the direction of change in the created world.

The great problem that exists in the western Church is one of personal comfort and wealth, and a set of values that conflict with those of God.
 
Last edited:

A Vestigial Mote

Well-Known Member
Do you really think it helps to stick your fingers in your ears? How can you prove that God is speaking? The real qualification for any prophet of God is righteousness. A righteous, humble, man will speak the words of God in truth.
It doesn't matter at all if "God is speaking" unless He makes it clear. It just doesn't. I wouldn't "stick my fingers in my ears" like you seem to be assuming, but it would take a HEFTY amount of evidence to convince me that "God" was speaking to me. I am talking monumental evidence, akin to my understanding that my dog is right there in front of me barking at me when she does so... and it would need to be VERIFIABLE by anyone also witnessing it. None of this "God spoke to me in my closet" crap. If I were alone and "God" came to speak to me, I couldn't even accept that as evidence. Not by a long shot. And if God knows anything about me, He would understand this, and know that it is going to take an especially obvious and public display to get to me. That's it. Barring that or something comparable, screw Him. He can do as He pleases and I won't believe a lick.

A prophet of God is good at listening to the heart; not just the heart of an individual, but the heart of a nation.
I doubt it, and you can't demonstrate it. So I doubt you too.

I would also say that a good scientist listens to nature, and is able to predict the direction of change in the created world.
This is nothing even remotely similar. A scientist can take his findings to a fellow enthusiast and SHARE any knowledge gained from his observations DIRECTLY. Completely different from anything supposedly involving "God" that has ever gone on in the history of man. Seriously... don't even try to compare these, it is fruitless. You have nothing compelling to offer, and science is keen on offering only what can be readily digested by anyone because, being based on observation, it matches to the reality we can all perceive.

The great problem that exists in the western Church is one of personal comfort and wealth, and a set of values that conflict with those of God.
The real problem, in my opinion, is that people have gotten and remained too comfortable believing in things without evidence. They're encouraged to do so by figures in religious authority, for goodness sake. And once you accept a few things based on little to no evidence, you are more apt to feel that it is okay to do so in other areas of your life. You can believe that atheists are Satan worshippers without evidence, that someone is a witch without evidence, that the election was rigged against Trump with no evidence, etc. It's dumb. Downright dumb. I don't trust the mindset nor actions of people who believe and push things onto others without evidential warrant.
 

Redemptionsong

Well-Known Member
It doesn't matter at all if "God is speaking" unless He makes it clear. It just doesn't. I wouldn't "stick my fingers in my ears" like you seem to be assuming, but it would take a HEFTY amount of evidence to convince me that "God" was speaking to me. I am talking monumental evidence, akin to my understanding that my dog is right there in front of me barking at me when she does so... and it would need to be VERIFIABLE by anyone also witnessing it. None of this "God spoke to me in my closet" crap. If I were alone and "God" came to speak to me, I couldn't even accept that as evidence. Not by a long shot. And if God knows anything about me, He would understand this, and know that it is going to take an especially obvious and public display to get to me. That's it. Barring that or something comparable, screw Him. He can do as He pleases and I won't believe a lick.

I doubt it, and you can't demonstrate it. So I doubt you too.

This is nothing even remotely similar. A scientist can take his findings to a fellow enthusiast and SHARE any knowledge gained from his observations DIRECTLY. Completely different from anything supposedly involving "God" that has ever gone on in the history of man. Seriously... don't even try to compare these, it is fruitless. You have nothing compelling to offer, and science is keen on offering only what can be readily digested by anyone because, being based on observation, it matches to the reality we can all perceive.

The real problem, in my opinion, is that people have gotten and remained too comfortable believing in things without evidence. They're encouraged to do so by figures in religious authority, for goodness sake. And once you accept a few things based on little to no evidence, you are more apt to feel that it is okay to do so in other areas of your life. You can believe that atheists are Satan worshippers without evidence, that someone is a witch without evidence, that the election was rigged against Trump with no evidence, etc. It's dumb. Downright dumb. I don't trust the mindset nor actions of people who believe and push things onto others without evidential warrant.

There is evidence for God.

What you denounce so vehemently is the possibility of an Isaiah, or a Jeremiah. Did they not exist, and did they not speak the words of God?
 

A Vestigial Mote

Well-Known Member
There is evidence for God.
Paltry, insignificant evidence, yes.

What you denounce so vehemently is the possibility of an Isaiah, or a Jeremiah. Did they not exist, and did they not speak the words of God?
Perhaps they existed, and perhaps they even spoke the "words of God." However, that would need to be demonstrated beyond reasonable doubt before I would accept it as fact. Until then, it is mere conjecture from the mouths of people who say a lot of things, but have nothing present in reality to back them up.
 

Redemptionsong

Well-Known Member
Paltry, insignificant evidence, yes.

Perhaps they existed, and perhaps they even spoke the "words of God." However, that would need to be demonstrated beyond reasonable doubt before I would accept it as fact. Until then, it is mere conjecture from the mouths of people who say a lot of things, but have nothing present in reality to back them up.

IMO, Jesus Christ is neither 'paltry' nor 'insignificant', yet he is evidence of God.

Did Isaiah not live in the 8th century BCE? According to Isaiah 44:28, and Isaiah 45:1-3, God named Cyrus, the emperor of Persia, as his 'shepherd' even before Cyrus' birth. Cyrus lived between 580 and 529 BCE, some 150 years after Isaiah.

This, I believe, is true prophecy.
 

A Vestigial Mote

Well-Known Member
IMO, Jesus Christ is neither 'paltry' nor 'insignificant', yet he is evidence of God.
This is exactly the kind of thing I am talking about. Things considered "Evidence" that cannot even be demonstrated to tie directly to the thing they are supposedly evidence for. That's what makes it "paltry" and "insignificant." Jesus' existence does not equate to "God exists." The person calling themselves "Jesus" could have lied through his teeth. Any way to know for certain that God sent him? Any way to know for certain that his birth was a "virgin birth?" Can these things be demonstrated? For example - if you could obtain something like a DNA sample from God, and then compare it to Jesus to make an observable link to Jesus' DNA, then you ight have something. But, of course, no such sample exists... nothing observable - even in the time of Jesus - could uniquely link him to "God." That's the problem you face... and there is no solution. Hence the reason I can't, in good conscience, believe you.

Did Isaiah not live in the 8th century BCE? According to Isaiah 44:28, and Isaiah 45:1-3, God named Cyrus, the emperor of Persia, as his 'shepherd' even before Cyrus' birth. Cyrus lived between 580 and 529 BCE, some 150 years after Isaiah.

This, I believe, is true prophecy.
When was this all written? That could easily have something to do with it. You're going to need something stronger than this.
 

Redemptionsong

Well-Known Member
This is exactly the kind of thing I am talking about. Things considered "Evidence" that cannot even be demonstrated to tie directly to the thing they are supposedly evidence for. That's what makes it "paltry" and "insignificant." Jesus' existence does not equate to "God exists." The person calling themselves "Jesus" could have lied through his teeth. Any way to know for certain that God sent him? Any way to know for certain that his birth was a "virgin birth?" Can these things be demonstrated? For example - if you could obtain something like a DNA sample from God, and then compare it to Jesus to make an observable link to Jesus' DNA, then you ight have something. But, of course, no such sample exists... nothing observable - even in the time of Jesus - could uniquely link him to "God." That's the problem you face... and there is no solution. Hence the reason I can't, in good conscience, believe you.

When was this all written? That could easily have something to do with it. You're going to need something stronger than this.

Evidence is not the same as proof. As human beings with limited knowledge, we are forever limited by our condition. We must use an inductive process of gathering information for the very reason that we are not omniscient. The inductive process is the method of science.

The great claim of the Bible, and of Jesus Christ, is that the Word of God is revealed. It is revealed to men and women who faithfully pass the words on to others. This is quite a different process to induction. If the author of the revelation, God, is truly omniscient then the process of revelation becomes deductive, and is itself a proof.

The problem then becomes one of connecting deduction to induction. A God who is able to see things objectively, as a true judge, is showing man a truth that he can only see subjectively. This leads to a problem that is only solved by faith. Faith allows a person to accept the truth as it is revealed by God. Faith allows a person to receive the truth in all its fullness.

Jesus Christ is called the Word of God because his revelation of the Truth is complete in faith. His words and his deeds are perfectly in alignment with the will of God.

You may wish to dismiss Isaiah without first studying his case carefully. But if you do study his case, you will discover that he lived about 150 years before Cyrus, and that his prophecies were in existence before Cyrus was born. In fact, it is said that Cyrus was shown Isaiah's prophecy to convince him of his role in the sight of God. It was Cyrus who allowed the Jews to return to Jerusalem to rebuild the walls, and the temple, following their exile.
 
Last edited:

A Vestigial Mote

Well-Known Member
You may wish to dismiss Isaiah without first studying his case carefully. But if you do study his case, you will discover that he lived about 150 years before Cyrus, and that his prophecies were in existence before Cyrus was born. In fact, it is said that Cyrus was shown Isaiah's prophecy to convince him of his role in the sight of God. It was Cyrus who allowed the Jews to return to Jerusalem to rebuild the walls, and the temple, following their exile.
When were the words actually written to paper for the first time? Note that it is not at all compelling in the slightest if they were written well after this "Cyrus" was alive and had done the "prophesied" deeds. And it is only the teeniest, tiniest bit more compelling even if they were. We're talking about things that are not reproducible to anyone, anywhere, and the claims being made come with the expectation that people change their perception of life and the universe significantly in order to marry their thoughts to the dictates of Christianity. It's not some mundane claim like that of Washington chopping down a cherry tree.

The main problem you face is that there are literally ZERO consequences to not believing your Bible's stories to be faced in this life - which is the only life we actually have any access to at the moment. If God wants to offer us "secret" lives that we can only reach if we pretend to hear and see Him, fine - that's His business - but if He doesn't, at least, understand why I didn't, at all, believe in Him, then He is nuts. Just bonkers crazy out of His mind. I'd easily tell Him so myself if I ever got the chance.
 

Redemptionsong

Well-Known Member
When were the words actually written to paper for the first time? Note that it is not at all compelling in the slightest if they were written well after this "Cyrus" was alive and had done the "prophesied" deeds. And it is only the teeniest, tiniest bit more compelling even if they were. We're talking about things that are not reproducible to anyone, anywhere, and the claims being made come with the expectation that people change their perception of life and the universe significantly in order to marry their thoughts to the dictates of Christianity. It's not some mundane claim like that of Washington chopping down a cherry tree.

The main problem you face is that there are literally ZERO consequences to not believing your Bible's stories to be faced in this life - which is the only life we actually have any access to at the moment. If God wants to offer us "secret" lives that we can only reach if we pretend to hear and see Him, fine - that's His business - but if He doesn't, at least, understand why I didn't, at all, believe in Him, then He is nuts. Just bonkers crazy out of His mind. I'd easily tell Him so myself if I ever got the chance.

If the Bible is God's word, that is, the revelation of God's will to mankind, then we ignore the words at our own peril. The consequences are not just to be felt in the world to come, but also now.

Mankind makes choices about truth and falsehood. But when mankind ignores the omniscient God, the One who is able to judge objectively, people become subjective judges instead. Subjective judgment is a great problem for mankind because it reveals only the differences that lie between people, not the similarities. Our appeal to God is to make us one, not to divide us into a thousand fragments.

By ignoring the Bible, and God's will, mankind is choosing the way of Babel. Everything becomes relative, nothing is absolute. There is no truth, and the resulting spiral of descent into chaos and violence is inevitable.

Jesus Christ demonstrated that the Spirit of love is the one power that can unify people. God is love. To deny God is to deny the power of love, and ultimately of resurrection.
 
Last edited:

A Vestigial Mote

Well-Known Member
If the Bible is God's word, that is, the revelation of God's will to mankind, then we ignore the words at our own peril. The consequences are not just to be felt in the world to come, but also now.
Haha... not compelling in the slightest. I am, by all accounts, a HUGE blasphemer. Just the worst. And do I experience any ill effects on my life that I could contribute to God's influence? Not in the slightest. I mean... not even one iota. I don't know why you think I would care about your little veiled threats here. And do you realize WHY you necessarily MUST make those threats on God's behalf? We both know He isn't going to make them Himself now, don't we?

Our appeal to God is to make us one, not to divide us into a thousand fragments.
And does God hear the appeal? Does He care? If He did, perhaps He would work on writing a better instruction manual. One that doesn't directly cause even His loyal followers to "divide into a thousand fragments." Probably more than a thousand in the case of Christianity. It's a joke.

By ignoring the Bible, and God's will, mankind is choosing the way of Babel. Everything becomes relative, nothing is absolute. There is no truth, and the resulting spiral of descent into chaos and violence is inevitable.
Not buying it. In my opinion, if more people realized that everything is relative, and actually thought about it, they would come to realize that we're all we have in this universe. I believe that humanity is all humanity has to help and to preserve us. To take us beyond the end of this world when it finally comes - even perhaps some millions of years from now. There's the real reason to band together, and stop being stupid toward one another. Not some threat of an uncomfortable afterlife that's going to be slapped on us by a being who supposedly "loves" us. Another joke.

Jesus Christ demonstrated that the Spirit of love is the one power that can unify people. God is love. To deny God is to deny the power of unconditional love, and ultimately of resurrection.
Heck... common goals can unify people. The "one power." You like to sound pretty, but you're not really saying anything.
 

Redemptionsong

Well-Known Member
Haha... not compelling in the slightest. I am, by all accounts, a HUGE blasphemer. Just the worst. And do I experience any ill effects on my life that I could contribute to God's influence? Not in the slightest. I mean... not even one iota. I don't know why you think I would care about your little veiled threats here. And do you realize WHY you necessarily MUST make those threats on God's behalf? We both know He isn't going to make them Himself now, don't we?

And does God hear the appeal? Does He care? If He did, perhaps He would work on writing a better instruction manual. One that doesn't directly cause even His loyal followers to "divide into a thousand fragments." Probably more than a thousand in the case of Christianity. It's a joke.

Not buying it. In my opinion, if more people realized that everything is relative, and actually thought about it, they would come to realize that we're all we have in this universe. I believe that humanity is all humanity has to help and to preserve us. To take us beyond the end of this world when it finally comes - even perhaps some millions of years from now. There's the real reason to band together, and stop being stupid toward one another. Not some threat of an uncomfortable afterlife that's going to be slapped on us by a being who supposedly "loves" us. Another joke.

Heck... common goals can unify people. The "one power." You like to sound pretty, but you're not really saying anything.

Common goals do unify people, but this has little to do with truth. Truth is objective and life affirming. The one Spirit of God unifies those in Christ, whatever their denomination.

What you take to be a veiled threat is no such thing. The plain truth spoken by Jesus Christ, and found in the Bible, lets us all know that this earthly life is short and that we all walk in the shadow of death. There is only one Saviour from sin and death, and that is God.

You may choose to think of yourself as good, but the clear message of God is that we cannot hope to become new creatures in Christ until we acknowledge our sin.
 

A Vestigial Mote

Well-Known Member
What you take to be a veiled threat is no such thing.
But it just about never fails to be brought up as a point trying to convince someone of the "truth" of your claims, isn't that right? You can't help but turn to the idea that there are "consequences" to be reckoned with in the event that you don't adhere to what The Bible tells you to do, or even if you simply don't believe. These "consequences" - do you honestly think they don't constitute a threat? When someone says something like, "You might fall and hurt yourself if you don't stop messing around on that ladder.", that's not a threat, because the person making the statement understands that it is only a possibility. You, on the other hand, are stating that I am, in fact, facing some consequences RIGHT NOW for my failure to toe the Biblical line, right? Taken to our "ladder" analogy," that's the person instead saying "You are suffering for your folly right now for messing around on that ladder, and we'll see how much you like it when you fall, which you will do. It is not a question of whether or not you do, you ARE going to fall, I know it." Can you see how that comes across as the person doing the admonishing sort of being a bit nutty about it? Can you see? It becomes something like a threat, and the person is almost reveling in the idea that this person on the ladder is going to suffer and see that the other person was right all along.

I don't care about your asinine "truth" in this matter. Keep it to yourself. I see nothing but the threat, and the idea that you simply relish telling people how horrible they are and how they are going to suffer for disagreeing with you. If you don't want me to think that of you, then stop saying this idiotic crap.

If, however, you don't care what I think of you, that's fine too! Just keep saying whatever goofy things you want to, and I will simply keep calling you out on it. It is wholly your choice.
 
Top