I've been really sick for the past two months. I found out that the cat I rescued had roundworms for approximately 6 months after rescue. I did deworm the cat, but unfortunately he still had them. I ended up getting really sick in January and then saw a worm in my stool. My gp acted like I was crazy, because stool test came back negative. Luckily, I know an infectious disease doctor that was able to refer me to another ID doctor. I took mebendazole that GP prescribed and then started coughing up what looks like worms and saw one in my nose. I then took a blood test for toxocariasis, but it came up negative, so the doctor didn't want to treat me anymore. Then, my second stool test result came back with Charcot Leyden crystals, which is found in parasitic infections, so he treated me with Albenza. I'm twelve days out from ending my albenza treatment 400mg, 2 times a day, for 5 days. I started to cough up weird looking phlegm again yesterday. It 100% looks like small worms to me. I tried to tell my doctor today that I'm still having some issues. He basically started to treat me like I'm crazy and asked if I want antidepressants. I told him that I read that albendazole doesn't always work on first cycle. I showed him pics of what I coughed up and he told me to stop taking pictures. He didn't look at any pic. I'm a happy person, I just want to feel better. Does anyone know a good infectious disease doctor that won't make you feel crazy in NY, NJ, DE, PA, MD, DC?
I appreciate any information. Thank you!
Ascaris is probably what you have. It has a cycle where they go through the blood stream heart and lungs then into the intestines. They travel into your nose, sinuses, throat and eyes. You will need to treat every two weeks with albendazole for awhile. I know of no doctors in USA that know anything about this and that includes ID doctors, they all act like your crazy.
Ascaris has a life cycle of about 56 days. You will need to kill all stages, from eggs to adult in each cycle to be worm free. Albendazole will do little. You need more broad spectrum meds, each working on each stage per cycle. You need to do your own research and start self treating. You can get vet meds that work well. Doctors dont treat parasitic infections of any kind. The few days of albendazole theory is just a cover story. If you really want to get better, you need to do this yourself.
Here is a good article (it is about horses but the parasite is really almost the same)
Zoonotic infections are a common source of pathogens. Your doctor s@cks, typical narcissist. Toxoplasmosis is a protozoa infection that is transmitted from cats, it is responsible for the crazy cat lady syndrome since it gets into the brain. But this is a protozoa and not a nematode (worm), two different things.
Charcot Leyden is associated with nematodes such as Ascaris (roundworm), perhaps your doctor needs more education but don't tell him that since he knows everything.
Dr. Kevin Cahill is in NYC and charges about $500 for the testing and office visit. He is one of the last helpers in this field.
Dr. Daniel Griffin is an infectious disease doctor in the New York area. I know about him from the TWIP podcasts (This Week in Parasitism) which you can listen to the podcasts. I do not know anyone who has visited him but his is very intelligent. Here is his contact info http://www.travelhealth.us/
Thank you I will try both. It's really sad that they treat patients this way. I just wished he would have looked at the pictures. I'm coughing up what looks like roundworms. If I'm wrong, he could have looked at the pics and said no that's normal or hey you have something else wrong with you. The coughing up is affecting my QOL for sure. It happens like every 1-3 minutes for like the first one to two hours (maybe like 1-3 worms that you can see) of my morning and then lessens throughout the day, but still enough to be a real drain. About two nights ago, I was really sick through the night, high fever and night sweats. I woke up and coughed up about 8-10 worms...really freaked me out. I thought maybe a die off? Sorry to be gross, but I know not to swallow anything from these this forum, so it's extra gross to spitting it out all day.
If my doc is and I'm crazy (being sarcastic), then why not help me with my issue. Maybe, it's a pulmonary issue??? Instead just send me on my way....jerk. Sorry had to vent...scared to live with this for a long time.
The anti parasitic meds you took, should have resolved the problem, although, at the risk of being criticized, I would give longer duration of treatment; up to 6 weeks. Ascaris have developed some resistance to these meds over time mostly due to agricultural overuse.
You could be going through an adjustment period, where your immune system is still acting out. The crystals are caused by the break-down of eosinophils-the primary cellular defense against detected worms. They could be activated by exogenous antigen passing in your gut from food.
In other words, your body is still on alert.
The best way to detect worms in stool is NOT OVA!
Although this is an ideal way to make a confirmed diagnosis, I like to rely on the detection of worm poop. It is almost always detectable in a given stool sample of someone with infections with helminths.
Thank you for your reply. If the abendaziole worked, would I still be coughing up worms 12 days from treatment and see them in stool? This is why I'm worried that it did not work. I can try to upload a pic from this week.
It has been 20 or so days of following my routine and I have been noticing some improvements!
- Better oral health care
- Constant moisture (first ten days or so with coconut oil, now with whatever. I try to avoid stick lip balms though, and opt for tube or potted and dab and smooth them on.) I try not to use lip balm at night, it may be too intensely moisturising and take crusts off (unless I want to).
- No coloured cosmetics for now
- Stopped biting/peeling for about four months now, with occasional slip-ups like two or three times a month. 😅
- Letting the crust build up for 3-4 days then gently removing by using "strong" lip balm (that melts crusts) overnight and rubbing them gently when I wake up. I don't think I can go out with crusted lips. It's much better for me to follow a constant moisture with exfoliation if required.
Differences I Notice:
a) Rawness/Raw area
- Before: If lip skin was rubbed off, raw, reddish-pink, inflamed area was seen.
- Now: I cannot reach this raw area anymore. Anytime I rub skin off, a white layer is already there which cannot be removed. The layer seems like its a white line running along horizontally on the middle of my bottom lip. This is the case even when using my "strongest" lip balms which were able to remove layers of crusts completely before. The layer present is stronger, like it's stuck to the lips, and does not come off. It's white when wet and clear when not. When wet, it does not come off, even when gently scrubbed with a toothbrush after brushing teeth (I know I know, bit harsh, but I had to check! 🙈).
b) Absorption of lip balm
- Before: If I put on lip balm at night, it would still be there in the morning, almost like I had just applied it, with some soaked up by the crusts so they can come off. I would say 15%-20% absorbed.
- Now: Lip balm is usually mostly gone from my lips when I wake up. It's like my lips drink it up/soak it in. No, it doesn't just rub off on my pillow on anything. And the weather is warmer and more moist than before, not cooler and dryer, so not an issue of lip balm drying out. The absorption happens during the day too. I would say 65% to 80% of the balm gets absorbed. I try not to use lip balm at night, but if I do, it's not usually a problem unless I use a "strong" one.
c) Peeling after lip balm
- Before: If I put on any lip balm, the crusts would "melt" and start coming off when I removed the lip balm and brushed my teeth.
- Now: I can put on lip balm and it won't make my lips peel after I brush my teeth. If I want to make the crust buildup come off, I apply something more "powerful" (like Vitamin E lip care stick or Chapstick Apple) and gently rub crusts off when I wake up after brushing my teeth, and a white layer is still present (see A).
d) Crusting Cycle
- Before: Dead skin crusted up on the first or second day. On day 1, the dead skin looked matte and grey. No deep set vertical lines.
- Now: Dead skin crusts up on the third day. On day 1, it almost looks like I have normal, dry, slightly chapped lips. Less matte and deathly than before. I have deep set vertical lines.
e) Area that crusts up
Has reduced a lot on the top lip and a little bit on the bottom lip.
f) Split lip
- Before: If split (say, while eating), the area underneath was pink, slightly raw, and soggy. Did not hurt.
- Now: If split, the area is red, scary, looks like it has been cut with a knife. HURTS.
I am hopeful and will keep updating. I will also add in any other changes I notice as well! Feel free to tell me your thoughts, if you have experienced these while being cured (if you are cured now), and ask any questions!
I get what you're saying about not being able to get your lips completely raw again and having those vertical lines. It's the same with me now ever since I used Gloves in a Bottle. I believe the dermis is healed. There are still 2 layers missing however, the epidermis and the stratum corneum. Ive found that these layers can be easily healed by simply keeping them moist with a barrier.
Right now I'm keeping my lips moisturized with aquaphor (it's been 3 days) and so far im seeing great results. Im actually seeing skin growing back.
You should really keep your lips moisturized at all times especially when sleeping so that the crusts won't form. If you see any white dead skin forming just gently brush it off without letting the lips dry out and you should start to see new skin.
Rainy, I know you like Spurgeon. You've posted some of his sermons and quotes, but you seriously need to mark him off your list if you think he taught another jesus and another gospel. He was a staunch calvinist.
It appears that Spurgeon was not as staunch in his Calvinistic beliefs as you make him out to be. Even I share some of their beliefs.
There has long been a great doctrinal discussion between the Calvinists and the Arminians upon many important points. I am myself persuaded that the Calvinist alone is right upon some points, and the Arminian alone is right upon others. There is a great deal of truth in the positive side of both systems, and a great deal of error in the negative side of both. If I was asked, “Why is a man damned?” I should answer as an Arminian answers, “He destroys himself.” I should not dare to lay man’s ruin at the door of divine sovereignty. On the other hand, if I were asked, “Why is a man saved?” I could only give the Calvinistic answer, “He is saved through the sovereign grace of God, and not at all of himself.” I should not dream of ascribing the man’s salvation in any measure to himself.
I have not found, as a matter of fact, that any Christian people care seriously to quarrel with a ministry which contains these two truths in fair proportions. I find them kicking at the inferences which are supposed to follow from one or the other of them, and sometimes needlessly crying to have them “reconciled;” but the two truths together, as a rule, commend themselves to the conscience, and I feel sure that if I could bring them both forward this morning with equal clearness I should win the assent of most Christian men. At this time, however I have to confine myself to the statement that all the grace we have is the gift of God to us, and I trust none will, therefore, suppose that I deny the other side of the question. I believe assuredly that we have nothing good in us but what we have received. For instance, we were dead in trespasses and sin, and we were quickened into spiritual life: my brethren, did that life spring out of the ribs of death? Did the worm of our corruption beget the living seed of regeneration? It were absurd to think so. God be praised for his great love wherewith he loved us, even when we were dead in sin, which led him to quicken us by his grace. http://www.patheos.com/blogs/adrianwarnock/2010/11/was-spurgeon-an-arminocalvinist/
"What is the heresy of Rome, but the addition of something to the perfect merits of Jesus Christ—the bringing in of the works of the flesh, to assist in our justification? And what is the heresy of Arminianism but the addition of something to the work of the Redeemer? Every heresy, if brought to the touchstone, will discover itself here. I have my own private opinion that there is no such thing as preaching Christ and Him crucified, unless we preach what nowadays is called Calvinism. It is a nickname to call it Calvinism; Calvinism is the gospel, and nothing else. I do not believe we can preach the gospel, if we do not preach justification by faith, without works; nor unless we preach the sovereignty of God in His dispensation of grace; nor unless we exalt the electing, unchangeable, eternal, immutable, conquering love of Jehovah; nor do I think we can preach the gospel, unless we base it upon the special and particular redemption of His elect and chosen people which Christ wrought out upon the cross; nor can I comprehend a gospel which lets saints fall away after they are called, and suffers the children of God to be burned in the fires of damnation after having once believed in Jesus. Such a gospel I abhor.
'If ever it should come to pass,
That sheep of Christ might fall away,
My fickle, feeble soul, alas!
Would fall a thousand times a day.'
If one dear saint of God had perished, so might all; if one of the covenant ones be lost, so may all be; and then there is no gospel promise true, but the Bible is a lie, and there is nothing in it worth my acceptance. I will be an infidel at once when I can believe that a saint of God can ever fall finally. If God hath loved me once, then He will love me for ever."
"It is no novelty, then, that I am preaching; no new doctrine. I love to proclaim these strong old doctrines that are called by nickname Calvinism, but which are truly and verily the revealed truth of God as it is in Christ Jesus. By this truth I make my pilgrimage into the past, and as I go, I see father after father, confessor after confessor, martyr after martyr, standing up to shake hands with me. Taking these things to be the standard of my faith, I see the land of the ancients peopled with my brethren; I behold multitudes who confess the same as I do, and acknowledge that this is the religion of God's own church."
Now wait a minute Rainy, I did decide to go back and listen to the video again since I have a little more time right now than I did earlier, but after listening a little closer I see she's saying arminians have another gospel too and she says it's because they believe they can lose their salvation.
Isn't that what you believe, that you can lose your salvation? Seems like I have seen you say that a whole lot on here.
I don't always agree with everything a person says in every video I post. I, most of the time, don't add a disclaimer either.
Of course, I believe you can lose your salvation because that is what the Bible teaches. I obviously don't agree with Spurgeon on everything either. I obviously don't agree with Arminian on everything either. I'm pretty sure I have mentioned that.
Spurgeon was a cessationist even though he operated in gifts of the Spirit. He was as stubborn as you, maybe even more so. He was even given experiences from God to prove his theology was off and yet refused to believe correctly. If he thought it was from a devil, I wonder why he continued to operate in them. He could have refused.
I wonder if you would still refuse truth if God gave you experience in some of these things. If God spoke to you in a supernatural way (not just a leading or prodding along) I wonder if you would reject His word to you. I wonder if He has already done so and you have rejected Him and what He said. Or, would you test the spirits and the word and believe God speaks today if He really spoke to you personally.
Brainwashing can do that to a person obviously. It can cause a person to reject truth even when it is clearly right in front of them. I think of poor Costi Hinn and I realize there are many who have walked in similar shoes. He was raised in an environment with false doctrine and doctrinal abuse. When he finally was able to break free of it he could not even distinguish truth from error. Because he knew something was very wrong with that environment, he rejected everything including much truth because all he ever knew was that truth mixed with serious error. He ran from one bad deception right into the arms of another bad deception thinking they have the truth because what he knew what he had sure was not it. The two deceptions he was/is involved in being opposites from each other.
I shudder to think if I would have done the same as he did, if I had never known the truth except mixed with all the error that he once knew. The really sad thing is that it seems to be all over now. It has been that way for years! That seems to be main stream now. That's all most people know. I don't see how God will let this continue. There are few churches even fit to go to. If you want to go to church it seems, in most areas, that you now have to choose between which deception you want to sit under. People just don't know any different, especially the young who never had an opportunity to go to a church that taught the truth.
If Christians are to avoid error - any error - they must immerse themselves in the Scriptures. It's the only sure defence. Personal 'revelations' have been the source of errors more often than not. They cannot be relied on to inform our doctrine.
Loquat: If Christians are to avoid error - any error - they must immerse themselves in the Scriptures. It's the only sure defence. Personal 'revelations' have been the source of errors more often than not. They cannot be relied on to inform our doctrine.
I certainly agree with you. Anything that God tells me personally must not contradict scripture. He has never spoken any personal revelation to me that is extra biblical. I know people do claim to get that. I don't base my personal beliefs on other's extra biblical revelation although I find some of it very interesting. I don't trust what God speaks to others. I do trust what God speaks to me personally.
One time God did explain scripture to me. The other times that He spoke to me personally, as near as I can remember, it was about things He wanted me to do regarding my own personal life. He has never given me any personal revelation outside of scripture where He wants me to make a doctrine of it. That would be crazy. All doctrine is already in scripture. I never heard of any real Christian group that believes like that. There are cults that do that like the JWs and the Mormons. I think Vektek would like to put me on that level, but I'm really not that far gone.
Now I do believe that God does speak to some via gift of prophecy about the future. Many of those prophecies have come to past. Most of them that people claim as prophecies from God are probably false prophecies. We should not make a doctrine out of any of them. I did stick my neck out and posted some of the prophecies about Donald Trump that I believe really came from God. So far they seem to be coming true, but only time will tell if the rest of it comes true. I realize that I still could be wrong as it has not all happened yet. There is nothing in those prophecies that I would make a doctrine of.
While I agree that personal revelations not only cannot be relied on to form our doctrine, I also believe that they should never be used to form our doctrine. However, personal experiences from God can help us understand scripture. For example, people who tell me that God does not speak today and come up with very weak arguments as well as twisted scripture to try to prove their point of view could never win me to their view. That is because God has personally spoken to me several times in my life in a supernatural way. Yes, I do test it.
I was quite shocked to find out that God does not speak to all Christians that way. I always thought He did, but I have learned in the past few years that is not true. I guess it is human nature to think that ones own personal experiences are the norm.
Spurgeon was giving out words of knowledge. He knew it was God telling him things and yet he remained a Cessationist. He was so brainwashed with that false doctrine that he could not even use his experiences to help him find the true doctrine that is in the Bible regarding this.
Again, no real Christian groups make up doctrines that are not in the Bible. Only Christian cults do that. I realize that Vektek probably does not even think I am saved and probably thinks I am a cult. The more I listen to Justin Peters and John MacArthur I realize where she is getting that thinking from. Those men have flawed doctrine and beliefs. Vektek can't see it. I'm not sure what your beliefs are, Loquat. I know you said you want to be safe with your beliefs. Being wrong is not safe no matter which side of the fence you are standing on. Demons are on both sides waiting to deceive. If they can't get your soul they will deceive you so that you can't do God's will for your life. Justin and John sound safe, but they're not. Demons work in their groups more subtly than in Charismatic groups where they are allowed to work by false manifestations, but they are still there. We really need to seek God for discernment no matter where we are standing.
Rainy, I know you are special and all since God talks audibly to you and not to me and many others, but do you know what he told me in his word? He told me I was eternally secure in Him! Whatever he has told you audibly can't trump that, can it?
Do you know something else? I don't listen to John MacArthur. So I can't be getting my thinking from him. And all I've heard from Justin Peters is his series where he lets the false teachers do most of the talking and then he reads from the bible to show how they are wrong with a few more of his own words added in. But I didn't learn any new doctrine from Justin. So for you to keep implying that I am just puppets of those two men is quite strange to me. Now if I was upholding those two men and defending them to the core, and saying they are sold out to truth and Christ, etc., the way you uphold and defend people like Heidi Baker, then maybe it wouldn't be so strange for you to keep saying that. But I haven't done that. Not at all.
Another thing that leaves me puzzled is why you keep seeking an answer as to if I think you are saved or not. You don't even believe anyone can have security in salvation, so you can't even know if you are saved yourself, not eternally at least. I especially have no desire to assure someone of their temporary salvation since I have zero belief in that fiction anyway. So why are you asking me? That makes no sense to me.
This verse also shows that Calvinism has to be a false doctrine since Calvinist really get a high off of the idea that they are special because Christ died for just them and not for all of us humans in this world. Calvinists believe that they are special people because they are the elect. They have been sheep from the foundation of the world. The goats were goats from the foundation of the world and will always remain unsaved and can look forward to an eternity without God. "God is love" does not apply to them. I think some are probably looking for a verse that says, "God is hate".
Opening his mouth, Peter said: “Most certainly I understand now that God is not one to show partiality [to people as though Gentiles were excluded from God’s blessing], Acts 10:34 AMP
Then Peter opened his mouth, and said, Of a truth I perceive that God is no respecter of persons: Acts 10:34 KJV
Vektek: I especially have no desire to assure someone of their temporary salvation since I have zero belief in that fiction anyway. So why are you asking me? That makes no sense to me.
Reread my posts. You have greatly misinterpreted what I said. I would never ask you to give me assurance of my salvation! That's the craziest thing I have ever read on this board!!!
Rainy, then why do you keep saying over and over that I probably don't believe you are saved? Inquiring minds really want to know!
Wouldn't it be wrong for me to believe anyone is eternally saved as long as they are living and could fall away from Christ at any time, according to your view? And again, that's the only salvation I believe in, a salvation that is eternal.
It would be hard for me to come up with the craziest thing I've ever heard on this forum. An impossible task really. :(
Vektek: Rainy, then why do you keep saying over and over that I probably don't believe you are saved? Inquiring minds really want to know!
Because that's what Justin and John keep chirping about people with my beliefs and I know Justin is one of your heroes. I don't really care what you think of me. I don't even care if you label me as a closet NAR as you threatened to do. Why would I seek to please you? Call me a racist too if you wish. I am not only special and a closet NAR, I am also a racist. Go ahead, say it. See if I care!!! At least I found out that God doesn't speak to you, well at least in an audible voice. I have been praying that He will speak to you supernaturally, not necessarily in an audible voice. I like His internal voice better, I think. The one is as clear and as strong as the other. I'm curious if you would keep your false beliefs and still expect me to change my true beliefs if you heard Him speaking to you. I wonder if you reject all experiences with God and only deal with Him on an intellectual level. I wonder if that's why you accuse people of thinking they are special, who use experiences with God, to help them understand Him and scripture. I used to think people who claimed that God spoke to them in an audible voice were really weird until it happened to me. That's not counting the two word experience I had when I was a child because I denied that until the others happened. Professional debaters don't use experience in debates I don't think, but I sure can't see them not using it in helping them understand God and the Bible on a personal level. It's useless to try to use it to help others see. They will just call you unsaved, a liar, a racist, a closet NAR and someone who thinks they are better than others. This is especially true when talking to someone you don't know over the Internet. Oh well, I've learned a lot about conversing with people anyway, among other things, by being on this forum. Thanks for the education, but I really must move on.
Rainy, I enjoyed Justin Peter's series on the dangers of the Word of Faith movement. I believe the work that he is doing with that is very needed, especially in the times we are in.
But saying that doesn't mean he's my hero. That's a little over the top I think. :)
Now in all honesty, in whatever ways you are referring to that God has spoken to you but not me, I would never want if it lead me to the beliefs that you hold. I could never live a day of peace without knowing I am eternally secure in Christ or believing all the other erroneous beliefs that you have. I would lose my mind listening to all those false prophets you listen too. So in other words, I think I've been protected from going insane by just being limited to God's written word. Thank you Lord!
By the way, I believe what this says in 2 Tim. 3:16-17. Can you be more complete than complete? This sounds like the scriptures are sufficient for what we need, does it not? But you say I'm so wrong for believing this and that I am missing out on so much more. But complete is good for me. I will be content with that. It's good to be content. The bible says that too.
2 Tim. 3
16All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, 17that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work.
Wow! What a mouthful. You are not willing to give up your deception even if it is deception because you are so comfortable in your beliefs. You don't even want to know if it is deception. Amazing.
I know we interpret this verse differently, but with your latest statement are you really sure that you are one of those chosen to believe the truth? "But we are bound to give thanks alway to God for you, brethren beloved of the Lord, because God hath from the beginning chosen you to salvation through sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth" 2 Thessalonians 2:13
After all, we know what the Bible says about those who do not love the truth.
By the way, I heard some good news about Joyce Meyers for all you Joyce Meyers' fans. She apparently renounced her false beliefs years ago. You know, the ones they keep playing on youtube over and over. She will probably never live those mistakes down. This does not mean that she is not still Word of Faith. There are some false beliefs that are tied to Word of Faith, but many Word of Faith people reject those false beliefs and believe only that which is true. When God gave Joyce her message, I don't think she started out with any Theological education. She picked up some bad theology probably from listening to the wrong crowd. As she grew in the Lord and in knowledge she saw her error and rejected it. I am very happy for her. You go Joyce for Jesus. God gave you something good to preach straight out of the Bible. Don't preach the unbiblical stuff that you hear from others.
I love God's truth, not what Rainy calls truth. I think there's a difference there. :)
After all, you said Heidi Baker rolling on the floor and acting like a complete idiot in front of that crowd, laughing hysterically, etc. was because of the power of God on her.
Uhhh yeah, I'm sticking with what God says.
Rainy, I bet you think that was an awesome vision from Heidi Baker talking about how Jesus pulled a hunk of flesh out of his side, and told her to eat it, and how she thought it was so ugly but then he turned it into delicious bread. And then he told her to feed that to all the children along with his blood too. That was great, huh?
The things I have seen you say are of God truly scares me for you.
I never saw Heidi rolling on the floor. I saw her not able to get up from the floor. I'm sure I don't have everything right. I'm sure I don't understand everything. You definitely don't want to believe something is true just because I say so. On the other hand, I'm pretty sure the Bible does not say that laughing hysterically and being not able to get up from the floor is a definite false teacher either. I'm pretty sure teachers are to be judged by what they teach.
I know satan has crept into some churches with false manifestations, but that does not mean that true manifestations of the Spirit are not happening.
About the vision, it sounds similar to something Jesus said in the Bible that grossed many out and caused many to stop following Him. I'm sure the meaning was not that we are to literally eat the flesh and drink the blood of someone. Jesus is the bread of life. I think that means we should feed on His words, His ways, His Lordship and His presence. Isn't communion symbolic of something like this?
I'll leave you to work out your own salvation. You definitely don't want to believe someone over the Internet that you don't know. I could be lying for all you know.
Jesus had a spiritual meaning for what he said and many in the crowd couldn't understand it. Just like Nicodemus couldn't understand the spiritual meaning when Jesus said, "You must be born again." Nicodemus thought Jesus meant born again physically. And then Jesus says to Nicodemus, "If I have told you earthly things and you do not believe, how will you believe if I tell you heavenly things?" (John 3:12)
1 Cor. 2:14
But a natural man does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually discerned.
Heidi Baker has also taken what Jesus said to mean something physical and her supposed vision that Jesus gave her was supposedly meant to comfort her in her fear of being able to feed the thousands of children as he said, "I died so there would always be enough!" Jesus did not die so that there would always be enough physical needs.
That's why Jesus said what he said to the crowd with his spiritual words that he knew they would not understand because they were seeking him only for their physical needs to be met. Taking his words to be literal in a physical sense would be cannibalism. But he tells them,
63“It is the Spirit who gives life; the flesh profits nothing; the words that I have spoken to you are spirit and are life. 64“But there are some of you who do not believe.” For Jesus knew from the beginning who they were who did not believe, and who it was that would betray Him. 65And He was saying, “For this reason I have said to you, that no one can come to Me unless it has been granted him from the Father.”
Jesus also said this in Mark 14:7:
For you always have the poor with you, and whenever you wish you can do good to them; but you do not always have Me.
It's hard for me to judge these people correctly without personally being involved with them, at the very least attend some of their meetings in person. Watching videos can sometimes be misleading. Heidi seemed to be good. I liked that she was not after people's money like so many of them. The hounding people for money issue by twisting scripture is a big clue to me that something is wrong. Faking manifestations is another big turn off. Heidi seemed real. When I saw her in person several years ago she did not have that twitch. She gave a normal message that was very good, sincere and powerful. There were no weird manifestations in that meeting either like what I see on youtube today. Heidi did not even show any strange mannerisms back then. At least I didn't see any. I'm sure satan has and still is trying to destroy her. Maybe something has happened to her. I don't have enough personal discernment to be able to judge her properly. Maybe satan did find a way in. I don't know, but I am able to recognize some of the lies being told about her on youtube and the web. If she has gotten off, the lies are making it worse than it is. The enemy will not leave these ministers alone. They are in a battle for their souls and their destinies just like we all are. They are also in a battle against the enemy for their ministries. I'm sure the enemy is doing everything he can to destroy them and get them off course. Many ministers have succumbed to satan. The church world is a mess. There seems to be very few ministers today walking in truth as well as preaching it. It is not easy. The battle with satan is fierce. I'm sure no one to point the finger as I have lost plenty of battles with the enemy myself. I will keep on fighting.
I am trying to do some more research about NAR so I can understand what it is all about. I came across this guy who told his story. I found it very interesting. I listened to the whole thing. I'm posting in case anyone else wants to see it.
I keep seeing people refer to the NAR as the fastest growing movement within Christianity by both those for it and those against it. By all evidence, that sure looks right to me. I know I've been a gigantic nuisance on here about the NAR especially, but at least y'all know about this fastest growing movement within Christianity when most people still don't, even though everyone is being affected by it, either directly or indirectly.
I'll check out the video Rainy. That's a long series he made!
As you both know, I'm not a great fan of 'personal revelations,' and I generally view them with more than a little suspicion. I note, for example, the fact that they nearly all attempt to predict the future, and insofar as they dare to be specific about events and dates, they all share one common feature - ie abject failure. They are thus proved to be false, and their authors also proved to be false profits (sic).
Another common feature is that there is rarely any agreement between them. Almost without exception, they all present different scenarios for end-time events, except when they follow the standard 'pre-trib, dispensational premillennial' schematic. Which, as you all know by now, I regard as just so much fiction that lacks any basis in Scripture. The wide disparities that exist between these various 'revelations' should alone be sufficient to put us on our guard. Their recent proliferation only adds to that sense of unease. It is now almost impossible to keep abreast of them all, and I have long since given up trying to do so.
So yes, rainy, I prefer to 'err' on the side of caution before I accept such revelations as the real deal, and I make no apologies for so doing. I believe my caution is more than justified, and I do not believe that reserving jugdment on these matters frustrates God's will in any way that will harm me or others.
Having said all that, I'm sure you have both heard of David Wilkerson (he of 'The Cross and the Switchblade' fame), and of his 'personal prophecies'. In view of recent posts by all of us (especially as they relate to NAR, Benny Hinn, Heidi Baker, etc), I hafta wonder what ya both make of this:
Providing the 'prophecies' can be authenticated as genuine (ie actually spoken at the claimed time), I am likely to move from outright scepticism to 'watch this space.' What say you?
There is another well-known prophecy (among Greeks, that is) that I will share later. It basically follows dispensational lines, but with some interesting embellishments that mark it out as belonging to the realm of pure fantasy.
Loquat: So yes, rainy, I prefer to 'err' on the side of caution before I accept such revelations as the real deal, and I make no apologies for so doing. I believe my caution is more than justified, and I do not believe that reserving jugdment on these matters frustrates God's will in any way that will harm me or others.
The context in which you stated that you "prefer to error on the side of caution" in this post I agree with and I also try to be cautious in these things. The other time you told me that you prefer to err on the side of caution, I thought we were talking about doctrinal beliefs. I do not want to hold to a false doctrine just to make sure I am not in error. That would possibly make me in serious error on the other side. I will never be able to do God's will if I am in error when it comes to believing some doctrines. If I seek God hard enough I don't see why I have to be in error when it comes to doctrine. This is not the same as stating that I am working for my salvation. We are to study to show ourselves approved unto God. Seeking God can be work, but not a work for salvation.
Loquat: Another common feature is that there is rarely any agreement between them. Almost without exception, they all present different scenarios for end-time events, except when they follow the standard 'pre-trib, dispensational premillennial' schematic. Which, as you all know by now, I regard as just so much fiction that lacks any basis in Scripture. The wide disparities that exist between these various 'revelations' should alone be sufficient to put us on our guard. Their recent proliferation only adds to that sense of unease. It is now almost impossible to keep abreast of them all, and I have long since given up trying to do so.
This also I agree with. There are many false prophets and teachers so of course this is the way it is going to be. Some I trust more than others, but most of them I don't give the time of day. There are a number of prophecies regarding Trump that I believed, but I still could be wrong. So far it seems to be all happening. I have to wait to see if the rest will happen to see if my discernment was right. I don't claim to have an over abundance of discernment and am seeking God for that. I've believed before and found out later I was wrong. Some of them get a dream or vision and can't interpret it correctly causing them to give us wrong information even though they may have really heard from God.
As far as those preaching biblical prophecies go, I have lost faith in all of them. I don't believe any of them have it figured out. Therefore, I have almost lost all interest in the subject. I used to study it and actually thought I had it figured out at one time, but have changed my mind. It remains a mystery to me. I have other things that I need to work on that are more important to me so I'm backing off from end times study at this time. I have limited time and need to get my priorities straight.
Thanks for the Dave Wilkerson article. I read some of it. It is very interesting. I will try to get to the rest of it later as time permits. Dave Wilkerson was a true man of God, but even he did not interpret all things he received from God, correctly. These people that get this much revelation really need to be more cautious. Unless God gives them a word for word message with dates I think they really need to be careful, but I know how it is when you really think you are right. The temptation is there to spread it. Later egg can be left on faces. I still could have egg on my face over those Trump posts. I'm waiting to see.
Precisely. That's why my initial position is outright scepticism, and if you read my post closely, you will see that I have not yet revised my views. That is still subject to certain conditions being met.
If confirmed though, this address appears to be more accurate than most. That doesn't necessarily prove anything, coz the trends he predicted were already in evidence around the time of this 'prophecy'. It was not that difficult to make certain extrapolations from those trends, so the jury is at least still out.
Still, you gotta admit it's an interesting case study from a discernment point of view.
I can agree with the last statement you made. But just as you also said, the trends towards all this were already in evidence and so Wilkerson wasn't the only one making these predictions. But they weren't all saying it was "a vision from the Lord" or adding "thus says the Lord" to their predictions. But sure, the first part of his vision is much more accurate than most. The second part about the invisible church being supernatually super, we'll see.
But I will say that I am confident the invisible church will be supernaturally super in the sense that their faith will remain no matter how strong the deception and persecution gets. Just like the apostles, martyrs, and other saints throughout history were. And that's pretty supernaturally super.
If that's what Wilkerson was saying, then I think he's on target there too.
Yes, some spirit is at work with these people, something is empowering them. This is why it is all disturbing..what or who is it??? I will be sold on somebody that they are a true believer and then along comes their doctrine and it will not be solid and then I have to write them off all confused myself about what is going on. By the way...sorry to just jump in here, haven't been to the site in sometime and was just poking around.
Beautifully stated. There is quite the falling away taking place I fear. As i have discovered Youtube, I am in utter shock to find that most of the so called born again believers actually abhor and look down on eternal security. It is all very disturbing to read what they say.
Yeah Diadem, I don't get why so many are against the doctrine of eternal security either. It's clearly taught in scripture. Of course there are some difficult scriptures to deal with like with all doctrines, but once you interpret those by the clear scriptures that teach eternal security in Christ, then those fit in just fine with all the rest.
It is disturbing for sure all that's going on in the visible church. Youtube has certainly been an eye opener for me too!
Thanks for commenting and feel free to jump in anytime! :)
Thank you, I will. Yes, I thought YT would be a faith builder for me, I am saved over 40 years, read scriptures daily. For the most part I am grounded.
I did this as a way to build my faith as in iron sharpens iron. However, turns out they are made of something other than iron. There are some good people and there are some really scarey toxic people with horrendous doctrines. So, in the end it has been a painful faith builder causing me to have revisit the elementary things I had left behind a long time ago. What I noticed is that even though I watched for entertainment, the savage law spoken of in Galatians began to rear its ugly head. I am crawling out now. The Lord had given me a snippet of some things out of this world, I was trying to make sense and share.
It's amazing the mysterious ways the Lord works, isn't it? I came to curezone nine or so years ago looking for some answers to some health issues. Never would I have guessed the real journey the Lord had in mind for me coming here. It's through curezone, and specifically ending up in discussions here on the christian debate forum, that I began to do research on what's really going on out there in the modern church. And even though all I have learned has at times been disheartening and my approach to sharing what I was finding wasn't always very well taken (and granted maybe I should have presented it differently than I did) nevetheless, I'm very thankful to know what I know today. The scriptures about all the apostasy in the last days make a whole lot more sense now than they would have had I not been on this journey.
So anyway, it sounds like we could share some experiences we've had in this crazy internet world.:) And of course, you may find me crazy too. Most, or all, here do. lol But I'm all about iron sharpening iron too and would be glad to change whatever erroneous beliefs I may be clinging too if I could be proven wrong based on scripture.
Speaking of the modern church though, I ran across this post today. Now the first set of pictures still had me a little puzzled. When I think of church, I don't think of a gigantic fancy building like some of the first set of pictures show. Of course they are gorgeous. But take a look at the second set, all taken at actual "church services". Shows a lot of where we are at I think:
Keep in mind this post in written satirically. And what is that one guy doing, sucking down some raw eggs??? Gotta be strong and mighty for the Lord I guess. Raw eggs, the breakfast of champions! :)
Thanks for joining in Diadem. I will have to agree with your thoughts on youtube being used as part of faith building. I know many of us here have depended on visual helps from that website for a long time to help with sharing the gospel, and I'm wondering now if we have done more harm than good at times. I have been here about as long as vektek and have found youtube being more and more difficult to use. It got so bad that we sometimes had to start using disclaimers on many of the posts due to the fact that the videos did not hold all truths that needed to be presented.
People today are not wanting to go to church and study with groups of people because they are hearing such negative things about what is going on in some of them. So they are searching outside the church for answers. However they are still looking in all the wrong places. I have now just started telling people to search the scriptures themselves first and ask for God to reveal Truth to them, for there is so much untruth spreading that an average person can not even tread through the muck and the mire to get to Truth.
As you say, just follow the excellent example set for us by the Bereans:
These Jews were more receptive than those in Thessalonica, for they welcomed the message very eagerly and examined the scriptures every day to see whether these things were so.
Combined with John 16:13, there is no better way to safeguard yourself against error. The next best source for laying down a sure foundation is a recommended book that takes on any of the major cults, new or established.
And if that's still not enough for you, you can always complete the set with a 'standard' work on systematic theology. You wouldn't want to read it like a novel, but as a reference work that you will visit many times, you will find it invaluable.
Personally, I like Berkhof, but there are others to choose from if he's too heavy going for your taste. A primer might be a better choice for a recent convert.
Well that's just it, who do you trust for a good book other than the bible? I belong to a reformed church but that does not mean that I should read just any book by any old reformed theologian. I look at hyper-calvinism as a cult as well.
I find most reformed to be Pre-tribulational Dispensational Premillennialists. At least in my area it is. I'm more of a Post-tribulational Premillennialist.
I had already formed my beliefs before I attended church many years ago when I was still in my twenties by reading my bible. You can blame my understanding of end times (if you wish, lol) on the JW, for as a small child I was taken to a couple of JW meetings by a relative who was exploring their beliefs at the time, and that is where I found the posters of monsters coming out of the sea hanging on their wall and I was forever fascinated with symbolism. I was too young to learn their teachings in just two meetings, but I did pick up an interest in end times that has stuck with me all these years.
As you know, I am confused about end times right now, but I guess you could say that I am more of a Post-tribulational Premillennialist too and have been for years. I'm putting that subject on the shelf right now.
I understand. I sort of shut up about this whole debate because when I studied the bible, I didn't use any extra books to help me. I have never even read the "Left Behind" books for fun. (which I guess it's good I didn't) I didn't read what the church fathers believed, nor did I learn all these different labels, which I have a real problem remembering what each one is all about. I'm not really even sure the label I chose even represents me completely, and then you have other book writers who make comments about what other labeled people believe that are not even true, which really throws you off.
I actually like ducks. I have a pond but no ducks. Sometimes wild mallards will visit. But I want ducks for their wonderfully rich eggs. However free range is almost impossible here due to the high volume of coyotes.
It was the vicar's day off (now yesterday), so our 'reader' delivered the sermon. It was on Luke 11:1-13, that well-known passage about prayer and how God's love for his children compares to the equivalent human love.
Unfortunately, he's not the most gifted preacher, and it's often a struggle to remain focused when he preaches. But he did ok, and at least the teaching is sound.
Yes we love our gifted Pastors, but they need breaks just like everyone else. I don't know what qualifies one to be a 'reader' in your church, but our Elders are called upon to preach and teach as well when needed.
I think a Loquat1 in the pulpit would be very interesting. I doubt any would be asleep by the time you were finished. However, I'm sure the poor Vicar will return to find people asking all sorts of very deep questions to him due to the teaching you gave. I hope the Vicar is prepared. :)
Yes, they do need breaks. They're only human after all.
Unfortunately, public speaking is not my forte, so not likely to happen. I don't have that particular gift. I have the same problem when called on to perform - I play classical guitar. Peformance nerves have been an issue for me since childhood, & still not managed to shake them off. Not as bad as they used to be though.
A lay reader (in some jurisdictions simply reader) or licensed lay minister (LLM) is a layperson authorized by a bishop in the Anglican Communion to lead certain services of worship or lead certain parts of a service. ... Anglican lay readers are licensed by the bishop to a particular parish or to the diocese at large.
I understand. I have the same issue with singing solos or acting in church plays. I use to do them on occasion, but when the MS affected my brain in such a damaging way, I lost all confidence in being able to memorize the words. There was one time I did try and be brave and sing anyway and ended up just humming part of the song. lol Of course being nervous does not help with memory either.
I have always loved a Spanish guitar, but not real sure what the difference is between it and a classical one. Or are you only referring to classical in the terms for the style of music and not the type of guitar?
'Spanish guitar' and 'classical guitar' are more or less interchangeable terms. For all practical purposes, there is no real distinction or difference between them.
The term 'Spanish guitar' simply recognizes Spain's unique contribution, both to its development (especially by Torres), and the repertoire with which it is associated. For example, all 3 of my links are works by Spanish composers - De Falla, Tarrega and Rodrigo. Glad you liked 'em btw. Another fav. composer is Albeniz, and Bach also works very well on guitar.
I might post some more links later- if there's a perceived demand. 'Slightly' OT though. Maybe a new forum should be started. After all, there are proven therapeutic benefits to listening to classical music, and for me, the classical guitar is the most beautiful of instruments. Then again, I'm biased.
Well I have often wondered if the music that is most popular here in the US is so overly stimulating that it may be part of the reason adrenals glands are all worn out.
Yes, please post more if you will. But I do have a question for you. How are you able to post videos from youtube that we all can see, and tanseybelle can not, if you both live across the pond? I didn't know if you could help her figure all that out. I think she would like to post some music as well, but it seems that not all are available from either direction. I hate that she is missing out on some and us too.
I wonder if some kinda licence restriction applies to the links she has posted? Copyright issues are the most likely explanation for such restrictions.
If memory serves, I believe the links I post are usually for vids that are uploaded under the YT general licence agreement, which have no restrictions attached to them, but don't quote me on that. I could be w-w- w- wr- wr- wro- wro- wron- wron- wrong. Golly gosh, that was really tough to admit, coz it happens so rarely.
Can you give me an example of what she's tried to post that didn't work?
Here are a couple Tansy couldn't see, but you are probably right it's due to the copyright restrictions. Can you see them? The third one had a general license and she could view it. So that would make sense.
Except for this one video that I can't view that Tansy posted. It says it is uploaded under the YT general licence, yet when I tried to watch it the video states that "the uploader has not made this video available in this country".
Hmmm...So I guess there is no tell-tell sign to 'always' let us know ahead of time whether we should bother to post a video or not. Thanks for checking on that. At least our chances are better if we watch for a general licence.
OK, for starters only, coz I gotta get me some shut-eye soon:
Your first link took me to 3 vids, and only the 3rd link worked directly - MercyMe/Ps 139. The first 2 carried the usual message: 'the uploader has not made this video available in your country.'
If Tansy wants to see the 1st two, she hasta load YT, do a search based on artist & song title (which are available from your links), and sellect from the search returns. Doing that, I was able to come up with the following links that should work for her:
For the video that Tansy posted for us to watch I did a search on youtube and could not find the artist performing that particular song. Does the UK and US have different youtubes? For I used the same title as the video for my search and came up with every other song by José Carreras, but not the song she wanted us to see. However, her link did work and sent me to youtube...so it is somewhere on the internet.
I'm slightly confused by your post - it's not clear to me if you were able to see the vid. or not. I was able to access it here with no trouble, so if you can't, there may well be copyright issues as it appears to be a Euro Arts Channel production.
Dunno if it makes any difference, but I've converted it into a link below, so try it again:
If it still doesn't work for you, then assume a licence restriction. The URL appears to be the same as for the US to me, so not clear to me why it wouldn't work for you too. Maybe there's an expert out there who can enlighten us.
I could not see it and I also tried to place the exact name/artist into youtube's search engine (instead of using the link) and it would not bring it up...yet Tansy's link did at least take me to it, even though I could not start the video.
Since it still doesn't work for me after you converted it, I'm assuming you are correct that it has something to do with license restrictions. What a shame. I was hoping there was a sure way of picking videos that everyone could see on both sides of the pond.
Thank you for checking into it.
Vektek does Thorn know about these sort of things?
Hmm.......that's frustrating. And just noticed the tiny letters GB in superscript format after YT, thus: You TubeGB
So, it could well be that we have our own YT service, despite identical URL's, which I find quite puzzling. However, when I copy the URL directly from the vid., I get a slightly different result - ie this one:
I hope my sisters won't mind, but out of respect for the killed & injured in today's terrorist attack on Westminster Bridge, gonna hold over those classical guitar links for another day.
Not in the mood for levity right now, and I have to wonder how that jihadist thought he was serving God - any 'god' - by his murderous actions today. What kind of twisted logic did he use to arrive at that conclusion?
That was very disturbing news from your part of the world today. I'm very sorry and hope you and yours are all well. May God bring comfort and healing to all involved. May God use it to draw people to Him.
Yes, we're all safe & well, and thanks for your concern and prayers.
Two young girls waiting to be picked up from school by their mom are now motherless. They will need our prayers, and all the love their dad can give them.
The other non-UK victim was one of your own. Kurt Cochrane was an American tourist in London celebrating a wedding anniversary. His wife (who is in a serious condition in hospital) & family should also be in our prayers. Of the 40 or so injured, around a dozen have life-threatening injuries. Many are tourists from all over the world, and our govt. is in touch with their govts.
Several arrests have been made in the UK, and I hear another attack was attempted, but thwarted today in Antwerp, Belgium. I don't know when this extremist insanity will end, but one day this too shall pass.
Refreshed: People today are not wanting to go to church and study with groups of people because they are hearing such negative things about what is going on in some of them. So they are searching outside the church for answers. However they are still looking in all the wrong places.
If you are referring to YouTube and the Internet, this is just not true, Refreshed! You have been blessed with a very good church to attend since you got saved from as near as I can figure out from your writings. You have no idea what has been going on in the church world and has been going on long before YouTube came along. I left long before I ever heard of YouTube. The reason I left was not because of spiritual abuse as some on here have accused me of. I left because of the wrong ungodly teachings. You don't need a degree in Theology to be able to see it even though I have one. You also don't need a book on Theology or YouTube to be able to see it. Loquat, a book on Theology is not necessarily your answer. Even some seminaries are not teaching truth. You can't depend on theological books or a theological education to be all right either.
God has lead many people out of those ungodly environments found in many churches. Some have left and have completely lost their faith over it because they didn't know enough to be able to distinguish between the God of those churches and the real God. Some became atheists. Others just thought if that's God I don't want Him. Even the unsaved know things are crazy. I could tell this when witnessing to people. I could see how spiritually hungry people were, but at the same time I lost credibility with some when discussing church.
I have had discussions with many Christians in real life who have left the churches for the same reason I did. YouTube had nothing to do with it. YouTube did not even exist before some of these conversations, nor did we have Internet access. Yes, there are many on YouTube and the Internet speaking of these things, but it did not start with the Internet. It started with the churches going downhill and people not being that dumb. There is a lot of preaching today that claims people will only go to church to be entertained. That may be true for some, but I believe that is not the major problem. I believe many people are spiritually hungry and would just like to go to a church where the truth is being taught. People don't want to be sitting under deception. People don't want to be used for the evil purposes of man. Many people want to find God, but they can't find the real one in those places. Yes, I know some are preaching that all church going is wrong. I have listened to them on YouTube. I have been accused of believing that myself in this forum even though that is not true about me. I am against sitting under deception. I am for godly churches preaching the truth. They are badly needed, but they are few. Many of us can't find them. I feel it is better to not go than to go to a church that is not preaching truth. Your soul is at stake. Your destiny that God has planned for you is at stake.
We had a 23 year old write a post in here several months ago bragging that he was mature well beyond his age. He was rebuking the posters in here. He thought he knew more than we did even at his young age. One of the things he was rebuking was that some of us did not go to church. He was probably referring me. I did not reply to his ignorant post. He had no idea of my background and just how many churches that I have been to. His response was the same ignorant mindset of many. People think you are not saved if you do not go to church. They don't care what kind of deception you have to sit under to be going to church. They just want you in church even if it means that it leads you away from God. You had just better go to church and give your ten percent in order to make it to heaven. There's a church on every block so there's no excuse for not going. This mindset does not agree with scripture. God would tell you to run away from deception. There are plenty of warnings in scripture.
Reading the Bible and prayer is where anyone needs to start.
As far as you, Refreshed, saying that you attend a Reformed church, I just want to say that you may be giving some people the wrong impression of your beliefs when you say this. I know you well enough to know that you are not a Calvinist. However, be aware that some people think that Reformed means Calvinist. The terms are used interchangeably today, but in reality the term Reformed is a lot broader that Calvinism. Calvinism only comes under the umbrella of "Reformed", but all "Reformed" churches are not Calvinist. Lutherans are Reformed, but they are not Calvinists. Martin Luther lead the way for Reformed. I consider myself Reformed and yet I am not a Calvinist.
@ Rainy - Firstly, I did not recommend a book on 'theology', but on systematic theology, which is not quite the same thing. Secondly, I suggested it as a third option after both the Bible itself, and any recommended work contra cults. It goes without saying that the Bible must always take precedence over any works of man.
Finally, I only recommend such books in the specific circumstances of a believer who is particularly concerned about avoiding and discerning error. I would never recommend a book - any book - as a substitute for the Bible, but rather as a tool to meet a specific need.
The rest raises some interesting questions, but they will have to wait for another time. I'm still dealing with a huge backlog of other points raised over the last few weeks.
You can disagree, thats ok, but I'm not basing my comment on the people on curezone or you. I know many people in my life and their stories of what they have told me. I don't have to go to other churches to find this out. Youtube, TV or Radio are just a few small ways people seek out ways to build faith. It was just one example, but surely not everything. You can share your own example with everyone if you wish, but mine was just about my own knowledge of what some people that I'm aware of are doing these days.
As far as whether I'm giving a wrong impression about being a reformed church or a calvinist...that's not my problem to work out. Just because calvinists claim the title of "Reformed" for themselves. lol I don't worry about it. All websites for my denomination claim it to be reformed. My church studies the teaching of Calvin and others, but we believe that "whosoever will" may be saved. Now that does not mean I believe "everyone" is going to be saved by grace. The gift of "faith" must be given, to go along with the "grace" that was given. Without it, grace would allow everyone to be saved, whether they believed in Jesus or not. We know that is not the case. However, Satan believes in Jesus, but he is not saved.
My church believes in the blessed assurance by faith, however, I don't explain it the way calvinists do. I make sure when I read the bible to add all those verses that was stated in the beginning video that you posted, to the addition to the verses that calvinists use and that is why I am in the middle between calvinism and arminianism. I don't believe you can disregard some scriptures over others.
I was not taught by the church but by the bible and the Holy Spirit. I was just thankful that the church that I found agreed pretty much with what I believed. However I do differ in my way of explaining my beliefs. I don't care for the term "once saved, always saved". I do believe in the blessed assurance, for those that endure to the end believing in Christ. Those who fall away for good, (I'm not talking about temporary backsliding) even though they once believed, were never regenerated or fully (birthed) by the Holy Spirit. It's much like the scripture I posted here. http://www.curezone.info/forums/fm.asp?i=2358983#i
The story of Simon the Sorcerer is to me an example of someone who believed and was baptized but was not fully right with God. I think Simon really wanted to be a christian because he asked that Peter pray for him when he was rebuked. But apparently he was not regenerated/renewed/birthed, and the Holy Spirit showed Peter what the problem was. I don't think God picks and chooses people to be saved or not be saved. Apparently Simon had something else in his heart...perhaps a false belief of some kind, or an unwillingness to let go of his previous life, and thought he could join it together with faith in Christ and become a christian. Whatever it was, it was similar to the problem Satan had.
Sounds good. I was just afraid that when you said "Reformed" that some on here would think that you were a full fledged Calvinist like Vektek. Some readers may have not read your old posts. It's good that you explained it here. Thanks.
What??? I sure don't feel like I have been nice on this forum. First, I repent to God and I repent to this forum for being so nasty. Then I disable my account and say never again! Then I have something that I really need to say bad. Since I can't get Refreshed to post for me anymore I then have to start a new account to make the post. Then I get involved with my evil ways again, mostly being mean to poor Vektek. Then I have to repent to God again and pray Lord please help her forgive me. Lord, please bless her. I'm so sorry, Lord. I hope I didn't hurt her. Then I listen to some crazy video that explains why she believes the way she does. I see the minister does not understand what is really going on, but I can see why people believe his lines because they do not have my background. Then I feel really bad that I was mean to Vektek because it is not her fault. She really believes it and is trying to help us. Then I say I will just leave my account open and only post when I really have something to say bad. Then I start posting when I don't have something to say bad and start being mean to Vektek all over again!!! Have you ever met anybody as crazy as me??? I'm so thankful for God's mercy. I wonder if He has ever used this much mercy on anyone else in this world as He has on me. I truly serve an awesome God.
Amen! We finally agree. I didn't know that you felt the same way, especially since I'm meaner. I like the verse you posted. It speaks to me and my problem. I need to do more watching and praying for sure.
Hey, that'll be me, and by a mile, so just take care you don't try to steal that 'crown' from me. I'm sure refreshed would back me up on that claim.
Funny how a joke about being nice to everyone breaks out into peace, love and harmony across the doctrinal divides. Let's not forget what we all have in common where it really counts. Or, as someone once put it, 'don't sweat the small stuff.'
Makes a pleasant change from the usual brikbats that fly back & forth, but for those of you who like your heated debates, fear not. Normal service will be resumed a.s.a.p., courtesy of your local friendly agent provocateur, aka loquat.
Loquat: Funny how a joke about being nice to everyone breaks out into peace, love and harmony across the doctrinal divides. Let's not forget what we all have in common where it really counts. Or, as someone once put it, 'don't sweat the small stuff.'
Me: Apparently it's not small stuff we're sweating. Read the latest posts. :) I'm interfering with the the whole purpose of them being here. That ain't small I wouldn't say. Would you?
I have a reply to one of rainy's earlier posts (not yet posted btw) that addresses this precise point, but I was being just a little mischievous, subversive even, to lighten things up a little. Yes, many of these issues are indeed important, but it's all too easy to blow them out of all proportion when set against the core fundamentals that still unite us.
Imagine for one moment that we all agreed about every single detail of every aspect of our faith. What a boring, anodyne, sterile world that would be. Exactly what the NAR's would want if they are to succeed in their mission to unite us under the banner of a single w/wide religion. Frankly, I'd rather viva la difference than be drafted into their ranks.
I've just finished reading Faster Than The Speed of Light by João Magueijo, and you wouldn't believe the enmity that oftentimes tears the scientific community apart. Their 'lively' debates (especially between string theorists and loop quantum gravity advocates) are often conducted on a level that only falls just short of open warfare, and make our exchanges look quite civilized by comparison. In fact, it could even be argued that scientific progress often owes a debt to these bitter disputes.
So yeah, we have nothing to be ashamed of. We're only human after all, so we're almost bound to disagree over some things. But sometimes we need to take a break from the heavy stuff, sit back, & try to put things back in some perspective. We can get too wrapped up in our own little worlds, and forget there's a bigger world out there.
If I'm misrepresenting calvinism then so are all other debaters.
No it's not what I love to do. It's what I feel I must do if I wish to continue sharing the gospel here at curezone because you will correct me and share your version and try and defeat my whole purpose of being here.
It is debatable mainly because you believe "whosoever will" means only the "elect" and not "everyone" like I believe.
16 For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.
It means it was a weak excuse. I apologize for being sarcastic with my joking. That's how I joke normally. Perhaps in debating it's not a good way to poke fun, or make a minor point. I do love you. I just wish we were not dividing further and further apart with constantly changing theologies.
Edit: Ok I already know you will say that it is not "constantly" changing. You always thought that way.
Refreshed: I just wish we were not dividing further and further apart with constantly changing theologies.
Ok I already know you will say that it is not "constantly" changing. You always thought that way.
Me: Yeah I have no idea what you are talking about. I've basically held the same exact beliefs since day one of being here. You on the other hand, have changed some of your beliefs. For example, you changed your belief about eternal security or blessed assurance, or whatever you want to call it. You debated me heavily on that subject, and then one day apparently changed your mind. But you never did make that clear at all to me, so I still thought you didn't believe in eternal security.
Maybe we are just back to communication completely sucks, I don't know.
No I'm just getting better at explaining it. Well in my eyes I think I'm doing better. Rainy seems to get what I'm saying. I can't help it that you can't understand my point of view. It's sort of like the problem I had trying to follow all the different end time labels you guys were discussing. I was totally lost in all of that. I was lucky to explain my own thoughts, more or less try and tackle someone else's ideas. I couldn't switch back and forth smoothly enough. Maybe in time I will.
I believe in eternal security but I don't believe in it the way you do. That has not changed. I already explained all of that. I'm not a calvinist. Yes, communication does suck. Most of it is that emotions are highly involved which makes the brain less able to reason well.
I quickly edited what I stated because I remembered you telling me that you had always believed those things. If you spoke about it in the past I just didn't remember it or over looked it as some quirky idea you were playing around with.
By editing, I was basically saying you are correct and I was wrong to make that statement. Sorry that it was not easily understood. I should have spent the time to make it more clear instead of rushing for you to see the correction before you replied back.
"Oh numo — so would I! It’s quite scary when you study this stuff in depth and find out how much distortion of scripture takes place to get there. And these guys (and we all know who the big Calvinist figureheads are) don’t even see that they’re making scripture subservient to their theology, when it should be the other way round.
I think they also make me nervous because extreme Calvinism, with it’s vision of a rigidly hierarchical universe, seems to be an extremely good fit with extreme complementarianism. Of course, what also makes things interesting is that Calvin was quite open about the fact that he got a lot of his ideas from Augustine, and Augustine was a Neo=platonist at one stage before he was a Christian. Some of Calvinism’s views of God — so remote, impassible etc, seem to have more than a tinge of Plato about them"
I agree – I too think God knew what he was doing in leaving it somewhat unclear.
It seems like many who argue in favor of one perspective or another in theology are mainly coming from a place of wanting to be right about their perspective. When one get’s to that place they have essentially put God in a box of man’s own thinking. God must certainly be beyond our limited brain function, otherwise He isn’t God! Now I do believe there is much we can know about God, but I don’t want him in a box of my limitedness! That would be terrible! Some people don’t realize that they make God small and incapable of being God. Got it all figured out do they?
Dee – I must have gone off the deep end as well! I DON’T want to be one or the other. I want to follow Jesus, not a system or vein of theology.
Bridget2 – well actually, there *are* other theological positions besides these two. If you do a bit of checking, I think you’ll be pleasantly surprised.
I am very, very glad that I’ve never had to bother with this, although I do have a bit of experience at trying to alert Calvinists to the fact that their pov vs. Arminianism aren’t the only game in town. I was met with skepticism, to put it politely.
I remember studying them in college, but it's been too long ago to remember them. I don't think we can fit God in a box of either one. Let's face it, God is beyond our human comprehension. We will not figure everything out about Him no matter how hard we try, but some of the ideas of Calvinists are totally crazy as well as evil and demonic.
Refreshed: So I wonder what the other point of views were she was talking about? Other than being between the two points of views of calvinism and arminianism like I am, I don't know of anymore. Do you?
Rainy: I remember studying them in college, but it's been too long ago to remember them. I don't think we can fit God in a box of either one. Let's face it, God is beyond our human comprehension. We will not figure everything out about Him no matter how hard we try, but some of the ideas of Calvinists are totally crazy as well as evil and demonic.
Rainy: Refreshed, I just wanted to add that to the best of my memory the other points of views were in between Calvinism and Arminianism. Calvinism and Arminianism are the two extremes. I think I studied two or three views that were in between the extremes. I wish I could remember all of this and what the names of the doctrines were, but I just can't. It's been too long ago.
Refreshed, maybe I'm mixed up. I can't even find them on the Internet. Did they take them out of theological books or what is going on? Maybe your pastor knows if there is a name for the doctrine that your church believes. Maybe he has studied them. Maybe he knows. I don't see how I could be thinking of something else, but I suppose it's possible. I remember taking notes on at least four doctrines and thinking that I did not totally agree with any of them, but I did believe some of some of them. I don't remember it being in a text book. I remember the instructor lecturing on it. That's all I know and for all I know I could be confused about all of it. Well, if they did remove it from the history of the doctrines it would not be the first time something like that has happened. I'm not referring to theology when I said my last statement. Let us know if you can find anything out.
Not sure knowing the label will be of any help. It was always called the Whosoever Will doctrine where I come from. It's more exact for me to say that we are smack dab in the middle of both, so in case any other group claims that label as well, yet doesn't view it the same. Just like in Calvinism and Arminianism, there are degrees of differences among people. So finding anything on the internet would be difficult.
Calvinists do not believe there can be anything in the middle, that you are either a Calvinist or Arminian. I don't agree with the extremes of either one.
I don't guess you know where your lecture notes are do you? ;) I don't mind discussing in more detail privately if you need more info.
No, my lecture notes have long been tossed along with a lot of other valuables when I became an agnostic. I know none of the names of the doctrines were called the Whosoever Will doctrine. They had fancy names. I think the names were labeled after the names of men like the Calvinists and Armenians did.
I have no idea where this post will fall in this conversation. I'm just picking a spot and we will see where it lands. :)
"Why do some people so passionately hate Calvinism?"
By S. Michael Houdmann, Got Questions Ministries:
Are you a Christian or a Calvinist? We received this question not that long ago. I am used to receiving questions/complaints from people who strongly disagree with Calvinism. But, this was the first one I had ever seen in which the person was insinuating that if you are a Calvinist, you are not a Christian. After engaging in a brief dialogue with the person, it was not just an insinuation. The person truly and strongly believed that Calvinists are not Christians.
We have also received numerous suggestions that GotQuestions.org disclose that it is a Calvinist ministry. I find these suggestions interesting considering that while we are moderately Calvinistic, it is absolutely not our purpose to promote Calvinism. And, if you read our articles on Calvinism vs. Arminianism or predestination/election/foreknowledge, our stand on the issues is abundantly clear. We are not hiding anything. What do they want, a flashing neon sign warning people "this website has Calvinistic leanings!"?
For those not thoroughly familiar with the issue, Calvinism is a way to explain the relationship between the sovereignty of God and the responsibility of humanity in relationship to salvation. To summarize, Calvinists believe that: (1) humanity is absolutely corrupt, unable to come to God for salvation on its own, (2) God sovereignly elects/chooses certain people to be saved, (3) Jesus' death was only for those whom God chose, (4) all those whom God has chosen will eventually come to God in faith, and (5) those whom God has chosen will persevere in the faith (cannot lose salvation).
A reasonable biblical case can be made for each of those points. Depending on how the points are defined, I consider myself anywhere between a 1 to 4.5 point Calvinist. I completely understand how and why many Christians disagree with one or more of the points of Calvinism. What I don't completely understand is why some Christians react to Calvinism with a visceral hatred. (Granted, some Calvinists have a visceral hatred of Arminianism and question the faith of Arminians, but that is not the point of this post.)
Based on quite a few dialogues/debates, my best guess is that many people so strongly oppose Calvinism because they hate the idea that they are not in control. They despise the idea that their faith was predestined. They loathe the concept that God choosing them had anything to do with them coming to Christ for salvation. Simply put, they want to think that they are fully in control of their own eternal destiny. They chose to receive Christ as Savior. And for many, they adamantly hold onto the idea that they can also choose to reject Christ as Savior after previously trusting in Him for salvation.
What Calvinism haters do not understand, or refuse to accept, is that God's absolute sovereignty does not negate the fact that we are still absolutely responsible for our actions. Yes, God elects people to salvation (Romans 8:29-30). At the same time, we must believe in Christ to be saved (John 3:16). The two are not mutually exclusive. Both are true. Everyone whom God has chosen will believe, and everyone who believes is chosen by God. Admitting that you cannot perfectly understand the mind of God is the only way to come to a biblical balance on this issue (Romans 11:33-34). Calvinists do not have a perfect understanding of how things work, but there is no denying, biblically speaking, that God is absolutely sovereign in salvation.
"God chose who will be saved" does not contradict "we are responsible for our actions."
Some of the hatred that is directed towards Calvinism is the result of some Calvinists being horrible at explaining Calvinism and/or explaining it in an arrogant manner. This sometimes accurate caricature has been parodied brilliantly by the Babylon Bee: "Local Calvinist's Sense of Superiority Visible From Space" "Animal Control Corrals Cage-Stage Calvinist After Biting Incident" But, ultimately, we cannot accept or reject a doctrinal system based on how some of its adherents behave. Calvinism should be accepted or rejected based solely on whether it is biblical.
Yes, GotQuestions.org is moderately Calvinistic. In our team of over 200 volunteers, we have full Calvinists, moderate Calvinists, Molinists, and moderate Arminians. The only point of Calvinism that is a non-negotiable for us is eternal security. The purpose of our ministry is to answer questions biblically. If a person asks us a question in regards to the sovereignty of God in salvation, we will strive to answer that question according to what the Bible teaches. If the answer happens to agree with Calvinism, so be it.
For all you Calvinism haters out there, would it help if I told you that you were predestined to be that way? I didn't think so.
Refreshed: I don't think God picks and chooses people to be saved or not be saved.
Me: Then does that mean you disregard every scripture that talks about election and predestination?
Do you disregard this passage?
4even as he chose us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and blameless before him. In love 5he predestined us for adoption to himself as sons through Jesus Christ, according to the purpose of his will, 6to the praise of his glorious grace, with which he has blessed us in the Beloved.
I think you do believe God chooses who will be saved, but that he does so on the basis of something good (faith) that he sees in those he chooses when looks through the corridors of time. But correct me if I'm wrong or correct your statement because if I'm right, you do believe God chooses who will be saved. :)
That scripture is describing His desire for all of us. That was His plan from the beginning of time. He has the ability to look through the corridors of time to see our hearts. In other words, since He knows us well, He predestines us, to use us in His plan. God gave Jesus the Disciples...He chose them...He knew they would have faith, because He knew their hearts. And He also knew that Judas would betray Him even though he would become a believer and followed the group, just like Simon the sorcerer did. Yet iniquity was found in them, just like satan.
That is how He is able to call forth the name of Cyrus in prophecy, because God knew these things about Cyrus and he was predestined to be used in God's plan. God forces no one to believe in Him, but yes God predestines people according to the purpose of his will.
Amen Refreshed. I hope that people who are confused about this will listen to the video that I posted in the first post of this thread. It is short in that it is not hours long like so many of them that I have posted in order to refute Calvinism. I bet I have listen to more of them than Vektek realizes. I have unlimited Internet and can listen while I do other things. That first video makes some good points for a quicky on the subject.
God is not some evil being that chose most of the world to go to hell as Calvinists make Him out to be. Of course, they will not admit that this is what they are saying, but that essentially is what they are saying. They will dance around this statement by putting it another way blaming the lost of people's souls on the people. It is true that if people lose their souls they reject Christ. But how Calvinists think that they can have it both ways is beyond me. By God choosing who will have eternal life He is also choosing who will go to hell. This is common sense, but not for a Calvinist. They believe people choose to reject Christ and yet they believe people who have not been chosen by God cannot choose to receive Christ. They don't believe in free will and yet they do believe that people can choose. I've never seen such messed up theology. It's as crazy as the alt-liberal movement today trying to overtake our country. Calvinism is spreading like an evil cancer into churches and the world of Christiandumb trying to overtake the true Church of God. I am hearing it creeping in more and more as I listen. Not only that, but these Calvinists claim that they are the intellectual ones with the sound doctrine. They claim they are the ones rightly dividing the Word of Truth. Unbelivable!
Oh here I go again. I was only going to post when I have something to say bad. We've been through this subject many times and have gotten nowhere! People can read old post if they want to read debates, or listen to debates on YouTube.
Rainy: God is not some evil being that chose most of the world to go to hell as Calvinists make Him out to be.
Me: But according to the view you and Refreshed hold, God looked down through the corridors of time, saw that the majority of the world would not choose him, but he decided to create them anyway just so they would live a short life and then spend eternity in hell.
Me again: "Whosoever will" may come to Jesus. He stops no one from coming to Him, ever!
No one could ever say, "I wanted to be saved by Jesus Christ, but he would not save me!" That scenario does not exist!
"WHOEVER WILL CALL ON THE NAME OF THE LORD WILL BE SAVED."
That was already in capital letters in the version I looked up. :)
Now that verse is talking about the true Lord, not some fantasy jesus that someone has made up in their head.
If you call on the name of the true Lord, if you desire to be saved by the true Lord Jesus Christ, you will be saved.
So Calvinists in no way deny "Whosoever will". They 100% affirm that. So if you want to be fair in what you are saying, and not misrepresenting what someone believes which is not right to do, then stop saying they deny "Whosoever will".
But this is what Calvinists do believe: they believe what the bible says, that people are dead in their sins, and that in their natural state, they do not understand the things of the Spirit of God. The natural man thinks those things are foolish! So how is the natural man going to call on the name of the Lord, when he thinks that's foolish?
1 Cor. 2:14
But a natural man does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually discerned.
17 the Spirit of truth, whom the world cannot receive, because it neither sees Him nor knows Him; but you know Him, for He dwells with you and will be in you.
It plainly says there that the world CANNOT recieve the Spirit of truth because it neither sees Him or Knows Him!
That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.
The flesh is no help at all.
It is the Spirit who gives life; the flesh is no help at all. The words that I have spoken to you are spirit and life.
So once again, those born of the flesh are natural man that DOES NOT ACCEPT THE THINGS OF THE SPIRIT OF GOD because those things are foolishness to him. (1 Cor. 2:14)
So nothing in man's natural state would ever bring him to Christ. The natural man sees that as all foolish! And isn't that what we see? Isn't that what the world thinks of Christianity, it's foolishness? They don't want Christ! They don't think they need Christ!
It is the Spirit that gives life! When the Spirit regenerates someone, then they are brought out of the darkness, and then they see their need for Christ. God doesn't "FORCE" someone to believe, which is another horrible misrepresentation that almost all of the debators against calvinism imply we believe. God "RESCUES" or "SAVES" someone out of the darkness, so they can believe. He rescues and saves them out of their slavery to sin.
1 Peter 2:9
But you are A CHOSEN RACE, A royal PRIESTHOOD, A HOLY NATION, A PEOPLE FOR God's OWN POSSESSION, so that you may proclaim the excellencies of Him who has called you out of darkness into His marvelous light;
That one was already in capitals too, I didn't do that. :)
20For when you were slaves of sin, you were free in regard to righteousness. 21Therefore what benefit were you then deriving from the things of which you are now ashamed? For the outcome of those things is death. 22But now having been freed from sin and enslaved to God, you derive your benefit, resulting in sanctification, and the outcome, eternal life. 23For the wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.
Ephesians 2 says it all:
1And you were dead in your trespasses and sins, 2in which you formerly walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, of the spirit that is now working in the sons of disobedience. 3Among them we too all formerly lived in the lusts of our flesh, indulging the desires of the flesh and of the mind, and were by nature children of wrath, even as the rest. 4But God, being rich in mercy, because of His great love with which He loved us, 5even when we were dead in our transgressions, made us alive together with Christ (by grace you have been saved), 6and raised us up with Him, and seated us with Him in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus, 7so that in the ages to come He might show the surpassing riches of His grace in kindness toward us in Christ Jesus. 8For by grace you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God; 9not as a result of works, so that no one may boast. 10For we are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand so that we would walk in them.
Who made us alive? God! Was the flesh any help at all? No!
Who is the author and finisher of faith?
2 looking unto Jesus, the author and finisher of our faith, who for the joy that was set before Him endured the cross, despising the shame, and has sat down at the right hand of the throne of God.
For it has been granted to you that for the sake of Christ you should not only believe in him but also suffer for his sake,
It has been granted for us to believe! Granted!
Repentatance is also granted! :
2 Tim. 2:25
with gentleness correcting those who are in opposition, if perhaps God may grant them repentance leading to the knowledge of the truth,
And when the Gentiles heard this, they began rejoicing and glorifying the word of the Lord, and as many as were appointed to eternal life believed.
Well I could go on and on, there is so much more. But I know you all cannot see this truth unless God reveals it to you.
But regardless if you ever understand all I just said or not, I would just like to see you stop misrepresenting what I and others believe about this. We do not believe God prevents anyone from coming to Christ that wants to come. We just believe no one in their natural state wants to come to Christ because they think believing in Christ as their savior is foolish. And we do not believe God forces anyone to come to Christ, but that he rescues many out of the darkness so they can come to the marvelous light, see their great need for Christ, and come to him. All that never come to Christ, never wanted to come to Christ. All that do come to Christ, saw their great need for him and came to him, and they saw that great need because of grace!
For by grace you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God;
Vektek: But according to the view you and Refreshed hold, God looked down through the corridors of time, saw that the majority of the world would not choose him, but he decided to create them anyway just so they would live a short life and then spend eternity in hell.
You are putting words in my mouth. This is not my beliefs and I am not going to get into it. I do believe that God has foreknowledge. That's about the only true part of your statement. I have no time to argue these things anymore. I'll let Refreshed speak for herself. You probably picked this up from a Calvinist teacher's view of Armenism. All non Calvinists are not automatically Armenists as Calvinists believe.
Yes Rainy, obviously we are in agreement that God knows the end from the beginning. But you said I was wrong, and putting words in your mouth, by making this statement down below. Please explain how I was putting words in your mouth to clarify what you mean. If you don't have time, then I guess it will have to remain unclarified. But I do not see how you could possibly get around this:
"But according to the view you and Refreshed hold, God looked down through the corridors of time, saw that the majority of the world would not choose him, but he decided to create them anyway just so they would live a short life and then spend eternity in hell."
Vektek:"But according to the view you and Refreshed hold, God looked down through the corridors of time, saw that the majority of the world would not choose him, but he decided to create them anyway just so they would live a short life and then spend eternity in hell."
To be honest with you the statement is so dumb that it is not even worthy of a response. I'm not wasting my time on it!
Rainy, I'll take back my cop-out statement. I don't want to erase it because then I'll have the forum edit police (Refreshed) on my case. lol But if you think what I said misrepresents what you believe, then I'll wait until the day you can explain what you believe in that regard before I'll make any statement like that again.
It sucks though, doesn't it, to feel like your beliefs are being completely misrepresented? But it's just the way it is, especially on a debate forum. Some things will never change. Reminds me of a song. :)
The Jesus of the Calvinists did not die for all humans. Calvinist's Jesus is another Jesus. The Jesus of the Bible died for all. Sometimes the truth hurts. That's why you couldn't listen to the whole thing. It was too painful for you to come to the truth of your error.
Yes, you say, "We preach that Christ died for sinners, was buried, and rose from the grave!" However, in your error, you create a Jesus that only did that for a limited number due to verses that you cannot understand like "All that the Father gives me will come to me". Calvinists twist and slaughter other verses to come up with this demonic doctrine and a Jesus of their own imaginations. And if that were not bad enough they proclaim how filled with joy they are since they found out that they are one of the special ones. They are now better than the average person. Some of them have real sick looks on there faces as they feed off of that high. Have you listened to any of Connie's sick videos since she got mixed up in this? The look on her face at times with that sick smile says it all. I think the family she married into got her mixed up in this false doctrine. She is now superior in her mind. Yes, the time has indeed come when men will not endure sound doctrine and rightly divide the Word of Truth! Like a cancer this false teaching is spreading in the body of Christ. We see it in study Bibles, commentaries, books and even seminaries. Christians are made to believe that this is the belief of the intellectuals. This is what Christians must become if they want to sound intellectual regarding the things of God. Christians would rather sound smart than walk in truth!
And they continued steadfastly in the apostles’ doctrine and fellowship, in the breaking of bread, and in prayers.
17 But God be thanked that though you were slaves of sin, yet you obeyed from the heart that form of doctrine to which you were delivered.
1 Timothy 4:16
Take heed to yourself and to the doctrine. Continue in them, for in doing this you will save both yourself and those who hear you.
1 Timothy 5:17
Let the elders who rule well be counted worthy of double honor, especially those who labor in the word and doctrine.
It's just the doctrines of demons:
1 Timothy 4:1
4 Now the Spirit expressly says that in latter times some will depart from the faith, giving heed to deceiving spirits and doctrines of demons
Do not be carried about with various and strange doctrines. For it is good that the heart be established by grace, not with foods which have not profited those who have been occupied with them.
14 that we should no longer be children, tossed to and fro and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the trickery of men, in the cunning craftiness of deceitful plotting,
But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.
No Rainy, I couldn't watch the whole video because it had too much error in it. I've listened to too many people lately that don't know what they are talking about, ad nauseam. :)
The doctrines of grace in Calvinism are very much supported by the bible when all the scriptures are taken in their proper context. And they have nothing to do with being superior or more intellectual than others.
Any calvinist that thinks they are better than anyone else has yet to understand calvinism. Rightly understood, it should be the most humbling understanding ever.
The Charasmatics do the same, speak in tongues or else and they fight one another constantly. There is never peace within their ranks, the open fire on each other all the time on YT. it is jaw dropping, then just psycho. When they start speaking in tongues during their videos I just think what the??? Then one of their wacko friends will come along with a "confirmation".
I have noticed there seems to be a characteristic peeling pattern in a lot of people who have EC (I mean the parts of the lips which are most effected by the peeling). It seems to be mainly the centre region of the top lip, just above the wet/dry border and the wet/dry border of the lower lip which peels and crusts the most.
I have looked through the gallery and attach a few photographs which show what I mean with respect to a characteristic peeling pattern. I apologise in advance if using these pictures from the gallery
is a problem:
My lips also have exactly the same pattern. Why could this be? Any ideas?
Incidentally Steven Johnson's syndrome, an autoimmune disorder triggered by hypersensitivity to various medications, which causes desqueamation (exfoliation) of mainly the mucous membranes but also the skin, has a very similar peeling pattern in the lip region. Some pictures :
Could it be that Exfoliative Chelitis is actually a disorder of the wet/dry border junction, not the lip skin as such. In a way it seems that, for me the wet/dry border of the lip becomes inflamed right as the start of the peeling cycle and causes a sort of air pocket or blister to form right at the inner border of the mouth which slowly spreads inflammation to the rest of the lip. Is this what other people experience here as well? Do people get a build up of white dead skin cells on the inner rim of your mouth? Maybe it is something to do with the saliva drying out, causing the skin there to be one dehydrated and die? Actually psorisasis, another autoimmune skin disorder is also triggered by dehydration of the skin.
Yes for me. Crusting and overall abnormal skin seems to be originating from the area where wet mucosa transitions to dry outer lips.
I mentioned in another post, that dry mouth might be a common factor amongst EC sufferers. Dry mouth is caused by numerous things, and perhaps that's why we haven't been able to come up with a universal cure for this condition.
Thanks for your post and your other reply. Sorry to hear you had this for such a long time. It really is a incredibly frustrating and depressing condition so I empathise.
I have literally spent months researching this in academic medical journals (luckily I have access to my university online resources medical journals, although I'm not a medical student, so I really should be doing my course work). But I felt like I needed to figure this out on my own because the Drs I saw seemed at a loss. My long term experience with other health problems also taught me to be sceptical about medical authority and misdiagnosis, to ask questions, be open to having your own hypothesis falsified, and be your own health advocate.
I think the EC has a lot to do with dry mouth (certainly for a subset of patients, if not all patients. Almost everyone on this board mentions they get a white line of build-up of dead sticky skin cells inside their mouth which is a definite symptom of dry mouth ). I think EC could be some sort of localised, autoimmune psoriatic reaction triggered in response to dehydration of the mucous membrane skin. Or it could just be simply caused by dehydration of the mucous membrane skin at the edge of the mouth secondary to dry mouth (injury from dehydration causing Koebner phenomenon).
It's probably complicated by other factors like opportunistic infection but I don't think that infection (bacterial or fungal) is the root cause.
I know that some HIV patients get Exfoliative Chelitis and it is thought to be caused by an overgrowth of candida. However, what researchers haven't really noted is that HIV patients are on strong drugs which cause dry mouth, which makes the oral mucosa, in already immunocompromised patients, succeptible to Candida Infection . Why does the candida target the lip skin in HIV patients specifically ?
Possibly treatment of secondary infection helps some people to get the inflammation under control and thus heal the chelitis with Aquaphor or similar emollient. I can also see a case for, people having less anxiety after their EC lesions start to clear up due to treatment with antifungals or similar(thus the cause of dry mouth is lessened in a sort of virtuous circle). Also less swelling means less exposure of the mucosa to air. That's my best, informed hypothesis anyway.
This is why we need randomised controlled studies. People claiming to be cured on the internet might not be cured for the reason they think they got cured.
People might think that the reaction is too severe to be caused by simple lack of saliva at the edge of the mouth but the fact that Stogren's patients get EC proves that EC can be caused by lack of saliva and consequent dehydration of mucous membrane tissue (complicated by opportunistic infection by candida and so on).
As you said dry mouth is multifactorial so it could be due to, various causes and aggravating factors, for example
1)systemic disease like Stogren's or Thyroid disease since "Burning mouth syndrome, a condition that causes a burning pain in the mouth, and Sjogren's syndrome, a condition that causes dry mouth, are more common in people with thyroid disease" 2)anxiety 3) a mouthbreathing habit 4) Allergies or nasal obstruction blocking nasal breathing
5) medications with dry mouth as side effects including Accutane 6) plastic surgery which effects lip angle 7) life style factors such as over-consumption of high caffeine drinks or smoking 8) structural anatomy of lips ( if you have poor "lip competence" due to malocclusion) 9) dehydration 10) sleeping at night with your mouth open 11) Some combination of the above factors as well as others not identified (most likely).
I agree that the cause of your dry mouth might mean that different treatments will work for different people, depending on the cause of your dry mouth.
Ok, so going on the hypothesis that there is something to do with EC and Dry Mouth Syndrome, I started researching various treatments for dry mouth. Currently, I'm trying out the following regimen:
1) I am using Biotene Saliva Replacement Gel on the inner rim of my mouth (it is not advertised to use it in this way, but I figured this is where I need it. It should be applied right up to the pint where your muscuos membrane ends).
2)I am using Gloves in a Bottle Lotion(thanks to CottonMouth for the recommendation). It is important to apply this before the Biotene Saliva gel because it forms an impenetrable barrier, preventing the saliva gel from getting on your dry lip skin (or crust, such as the case may be) and thus preventing irritation.
3)Using Saliva Stimulant mints.
4)Wearing an Easy Sleep Pro Chin strap ( a bit of headgear that stops your from mouthbreathingg in the night).
5) Using an air humidified in my room during the day (directed near my face).
My case is really severe but I started using this only recently and am already seeing some results.
I found out that HIV can be a cause of dry mouth so that supports the hypothesis that EC in aids patients could be caused due to dry mouth as a result of drugs and reduced salivary flow caused by the condition! It seems that Candida Infection of lip tissue is precipitated by dry mouth!
Today's dentists lists various causes of Dry Mouth:
"Other causes, and there are many, are chemotherapy and radiation, especially in the head and neck region, and medical conditions such as rheumatoid arthritis, Sjogren’s Syndrome or hypthyroidism. Sjogren’s Syndrome is an auto-immune disease which attacks the salivary and tear glands. HIV also causes reduction in salivary flow. Nerve damage to the head or neck after an injury may be a culprit, and bulimia and anorexia "
I wish every body was the same, but unfortunately, it's not. It's the same reason or lack of reason perhaps, that one person is deadly allergic to peanuts while you or I have no reaction to it, or pretty much any other medical conditions that some have and most don't. It's really a luck of the draw. For example, my dad constantly licks his lips and snores / mouth breathes during night, and yet he has normal lips, and I am guessing I pretty much did the same when I was young and well... here I am.
Apologies if I misunderstood something about your question.
I will try to answer.
There are various different causes and levels of severity of dry mouth.
If you have dry mouth from simple dehydration, or from electrolyte imbalance due to too much exercise for example, the dry mouth is quite transient and can be alleviated by drinking water. So it goes away quickly.
However, if you have a dry mouth due to a systemic illness (like Sjoren's syndrome, or anxiety disorder or HIV, or some kind of salivary gland dysfunction), then the dry mouth is there persistently 24 hours a day, every day. It constantly causes irritation of your mucous membranes inside the mouth.
When that happens, drinking water is not enough because it only temporarily wets the mouth.
Moreover, saliva contains various natural antimicrobial properties so artificlly replacing the saliva by just wetting the mouth isn't really curing the problem.
What I'm trying to figure out here is the common factor between various types of known patient population groups who suffer from Exfoliative
I want to focus on what we know for sure, from independently verified research, to come to a hypothesis or conclusion.
We know for sure because it is verified in independent research that Sjoren's syndrome, a condition that effects saliva production in the mouth, causes Exfoliative Chelitis.
We know for sure, because it is verified in independent research, that AIDS patients suffer from Exfoliative Chelitis. We know for sure, because it is verified in independent research that those people who have Exfoliative Chelitis of unknown origin, have a much higher likelihood of Anxiety Disorder and Hypothyrodisim. And we know for sure, because it is reported in academic literature, that lip filler patients report they experience desqueamation (exfoliation of lip skin).
So to to figure out what is the root cause of Exfoliative Chelitis we need to ask what do these various , extremely diverse , patient groups have in common. What is the common factor?
The answer is xerostomia (or dry mouth).
Research concluded that Oral Candida Infection resulted in Exfoliative Chelitis in AIDS patients. . Well, it may well be true that candida contibutes to EC in aids patients. However, oral Candida Infection or thrush on average does not produce the symptoms of Exfoliative Chelitis.
So there has to be another factor. Why does candida attack the lip skin specifically in HIV patients. since a) HIV reduces salivary excretions and b) antiretroviral therapy results in dry mouth, it could be argued that a dry mouth causes Chelitis (the damaged and vulnerable lip skin is then a good medium for the candida to proliferate in immunocompromised patients).
Similarly, Sjoren's syndrome patients also get Exfoliative Chelitis. It is a very different condition from AIDS. The condition effects saliva exertions in the mouth. However, Sjoren's syndrome patients with EC also demonstrate Candida Infection . Why? Because the dry mouth, without proper antimicrobial properties, is vulnerable to secondary infection by candida.
So my conclusion is that candida infection observed in both Sjoren's patients and AIDS patients who have Exfoliative Chelitis is secondary to primary cause which is xerostomia.
Similarly , Exfoliative Chelitis patients with idiopathic (unknown cause) , according to literature , have a much higher likelihood of having an anxiety disorder.
Well, we know, because it is verified in independent research, that anxiety disorder results in a ) mouthbreathing and b)generalised dry mouth. What is more, a lot of anxiety disorder patients are on medication which increase the chances of having a dry mouth.
Not everyone who has xerostomia has EC but pretty much every population of patients who have EC have a high likelihood of having xerostomia.
So how come EC occurs in some people and not others with Sjoren's syndrome?
I can't say definitlevely. Maybe it has to do with severity of the xerostomia and other unknown factors (immune system, other lifestyle factors, anatomical structure of mouth ect). I just can't say. I would need to do independent research to establish this.
What I think I can conclude, with some, confidence, is that there is a high correlation between Exfoliative Chelitis and Xerostomia.
Hi there, what is the texture of your EC, like ? It seems to me that EC is by definition about having dry, crusty and or scaly lip skin. Is the texture of the peeling parts not dry?
I think EC is likely multifactorial and of course I can't say what causes it exactly in all cases. However, from my academic research, from my self-observation, and from reading posts people made on this board about their symptoms, it seems to me that xerostomia (lack of saliva production) is a significant contributory factor . What I can conclude with certainty is that EC is *Correlated* with xerostomia .
I can't conclude definitively it cause it without doing controlled studies.
I also think that EC is complicated by secondary infection (fungal or bacterial) in most cases. I think potentially EC can be caused by self injury in some people as well (like lip biting) but when people say they used to bite their lips and then stopped and still have EC after a significant length of time, then the EC is not caused by self injury but another factor.
As I say, maybe there are other factors involved (like autoimmune reaction or allergy in some cases). However, that doesn't mean that xerostomia is not a significant contibutory factor in a high number of cases.
Apparently., you wouldn't even notice you had dry mouth until salvia production dropped below 50% its normal rate, so not feeling like you don't have a dry moth doesn't necessarily mean you don't have xerostomia. Of course, you may not have it.
This scabbing and peeling of the lip are symptoms of the lip skin being too dry. It's just that the dryness is only visible on part of the lip.
The fact that using lip balms didn't help much doesn't mean that the problem is not dryness of the skin.
When I had less severe EC, aquaphor and lip balm could fix it. When the crusting got really severe, I couldn't use lip balm any more. It's not that the lip wasn't dry when it got more severe. In fact, it was much more severe level of dehydration of the lip skin. It's just that the crusts protected the skin better from dehydration than the aquaphor and the aquaphor caused the crusts (a natural protective barrier, a bit like a biological bandage) to fall off.
In my opinion, why Xerostomia causes or contributes to EC is that the dehydration of the skin is starting on the inside the mouth (on the labial mucosa), not on the outside of the mouth.
Lip skin is actually naturally the driest part of the body because it doesn't have its own oil glands. It relies on proximity to the mouth to hydrate it (if you think about it, the mouth is kind of like a natural humidifier). When the mouth gets too dry, the mucous membrane part which transitions to the dry outer lip (the labial mucosa transition to the vermilion), loses it's moisture so it starts getting dry, scaly or crusty. When this happens, the outer lip loses it's moisture as well because the outer lip relies on its proximity to the wet inner lip to remain hydrated.
I think this is why everyone's EC in the pictures I posted seems to be more severe near the inner rim of the mouth (that is, near the wet/dry border).
Something that bothers me is that if you view the peeling lips Image Gallery all of are lips are big and literally the exact same size.I remember you saying that you have a class 2 malocclusion, like me. I don't know, maybe we have some weird combination of jaw shape and lip size that doesn't let are saliva or whatever moisturize the labial mucosa, which leads to the vermillion border forming crust.
Hi Subhuman, yes, I noticed that as well. I think a lot of people who have EC seem not to have a tight "lip seal". They seem to have a kind of lip structure (probably as a result of jaw shape), which causes part of the labial mucosa to show on the bottom lip. If you look at the lips of the general population, not everybody has this kind of lip shape. I think that lip shape in combination with xerostomia probably contributes to the development of EC. If people don't get what I'm talking about when I say "lip seal", let know and i'll try to explain it better or do a diagram or something,
I will say I am starting to see some very good results from applying biotene artificial saliva gel to the inner rim of my mouth (the labial mucosa) so I highly recommend that. I will keep updated on progress. If anybody decides to use this method, just make sure you don't get the saliva gel on the naturally dry part of the skin (the vermilion ).
I love people who are dedicated to researching this condition. It gives me and I'm sure others as well, hope for a better future. I am trying similar things to alleviate dry mouth symptoms.
Things that I'm currently trying are:
1. Raised the bed 6 inches
2. Using oral probiotics - not sure how helpful that is but it is supposed to work similar to gut probiotics.
3. Alkaline Water after waking up (only started yesterday).
Although there isn't much reviewed evidence of Alkaline Water / oral probiotics working, I figured might as well give it a shot, since I do get a lot of acidity during sleep especially and this could be due to stress / anxiety / depression / etc., which unfortunately nearly all of us here suffer from because of this.
I have used gloves in a box previously for about a year or so. It didn't seem to make it better or worse, just kept it neutral. I have also used humidifier but my lips seemed to absorb the additional moisture and become more swollen which resulted in more trauma to the skin aka more crusting, so I stopped doing that.
Continue with your methods, and I'll continue with mine and lets pray one of us finds a decent headway.
"For me the wet/dry border of the lip becomes inflamed right as the start of the peeling cycle and causes a sort of air pocket or blister to form right at the inner border of the mouth which slowly spreads inflammation to the rest of the lip"
The "air pockets" what you mentioned which I thought was interesting I believe speeds up the inflammation process. From my experience, when the crustation cycle starts to begin it usually starts where there is an air pocket.
Death in the Bible means separation. There are different kinds of deaths referred to in the Bible. In this verse death means eternal separation from God. This separation is also referred to as the second death in the book of Revelation.
"But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death." Revelation 21:8
Are you telling me if someone doesn't believe in God he is going to burn their souls to destroy them for good. Why so hard, why not just show himself to them so they believe, not everyone gets a calling, perhaps some people need to have it proved instead of faith. Why is God so hard on people's souls after they die if they were not convinced in life, why not give them a second chance after death, there are good people who don't believe who do good things, is it really right to burn their souls because it had to be proved to them.
Because God loved us God provided a way for us to be saved. It is a free gift from God to all people who will accept the free gift. Many refuse the gift. If we do not accept the free gift it will never be ours. Any person who does not accept the free gift of God will perish. That free gift is Jesus. We cannot be saved by works no matter how good our works are. If we could be saved by works God would never have sent His son to die a tormenting death on the cross for us. There would be no need for Him to do that. We are only saved by the sacrifical blood that Jesus shed on the cross for our sins. There is no other way to be saved. No one has ever been good enough to be saved by their own works. All of us have sinned. Even those of us who are good people. You will read about all of this as you continue to read your new Bible.
The Bible speaks of three main different types of death. Death, in the Bible, refers to separation. Physical death is when your body is separated from your spirit and soul. When God said "You will surely die" He was referring to spiritual death. Spiritual death is separation from God. Because of the sin in the Garden we are all born into this spiritual death. However, God made a way for us to become spiritually alive again through Christ Jesus. Jesus is God's free gift to us, but we have to accept this free gift of God in order for the gift to become ours. Once we accept God's free gift we become alive spiritually. All things become new to us.
This also explains the separation(death) from God. If we don't receive Christ we will experience eternal separation from God. Separation from God can be temporary or permanent. If we receive Christ during our physical life on earth, then our separation from God was temporary.
Here is a good article that explains more of the different types of death in the bible.
"Death is never defined by lexicographers as extinction, annihilation, non-existence or unconsciousness
Death in the Bible is always pictured as a separation between two things.
Click to ViewFalse teachers wrongly define death as extinction, annihilation, non-existence or unconsciousness.
Click to ViewMan has no conscious existence apart from the body after he dies"
Tansy, if someone came up to you and asked you how to be saved would they really understand how to be saved by telling them "we receive God by faith". The "we receive God by faith" statement is too broad for people to really understand what they must do to be saved. While this statement is true we must look at the other verses in the Bible regarding salvation in order to understand what it means. If we don't do this people will not know what to do in order to become saved. While it is true that we are not saved by our own works, there is such an emphasis on this that some Christians have perverted this statement which causes people to lose out on salvation. Breathing now becomes a work. Making a decision now becomes a work. Thinking now becomes a work. Repentance means a change of thinking, but that is now a work.Talking to God now becomes a work. This is crazy.
In Acts 2 during Peter's sermon, Peter exhorted which means he urged them to do something. The Bible says they were pricked to the heart which means the Holy Spirit was convicting them. About 3 thousand souls were saved that day. You may read the whole chapter if you wish. You will find Peter exhorting people to believe on Christ. He is asking them to make a decision or the word exhort would not be in there. He is asking them to repent.
We must study the "we receive God by faith" statement in context of the whole Bible. When we study a phrase from the Bible we first look at the context within the verse, next the passage, then chapter and finally the whole Bible. It is not confusing when we do this. If we don't study the Bible this way we will find crazy contradictions and become confused.
When Paul and Silas was asked this question in these verses we see that they told them to "Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ." This narrows it down some. "Then he called for a light, and sprang in, and came trembling, and fell down before Paul and Silas, And brought them out, and said, Sirs, what must I do to be saved? And they said, Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved, and thy house."
Now we need to know what it means to believe on the Lord Jesus Christ. Does it mean that we just need to believe that Jesus existed in order to be saved? I think not because the Bible is clear in the book of James that even devils believe that and yet they are not saved.
Romans 10:9-13 narrows it down even more. " That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved. 10 For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation. 11 For the scripture saith, Whosoever believeth on him shall not be ashamed.12 For there is no difference between the Jew and the Greek: for the same Lord over all is rich unto all that call upon him. 13 For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved. "
In John 3:3 Jesus explained it as a spiritual birth. "Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God."
Titus 3:5 explains it as "Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost;"
2 Corinthians 5:17 explains it as "Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new."
In John 17:3 Jesus explains salvation as an intimate relationship with God. "And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent."
Acts 4:12 states there is no other way to be saved. "Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved."
John 14:6: explains Jesus is the only way to God. "Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me."
John 1:12 explains that we need to receive Christ to be saved and that as the receivers we believe in His
name. "But as many as received Him, to them He gave the right to become children of God, to those who believe in His name"
2 Corinthians 7:10 explains it like this. "For godly sorrow worketh repentance to salvation not to be repented of: but the sorrow of the world worketh death."
Ephesians 2:8-9 explains that we have been saved by grace through faith. "For by grace you have been saved through faith, and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God, not of works, lest anyone should boast."
John 3:16 "For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life."
Is this really confusing to you? The Bible explains salvation in several different ways so that we can truly understand it. As the Father draws us and the Holy Spirit convicts us we receive Christ into our lives. At that point we experience a spiritual birth. All things have now become new. The Holy Spirit has regenerated us. We have become born again.