[i]The only teacher we can have is GOD.[/i]
Brother, I am just as sympathetic and at times outraged at these things as you and others. The acronym WOF alone enough to give a great rise to indignation for the sheer manipulation and twisting, contorting of the scriptures, the bleating of the sheep, the psychological abuse ... Our so called modern day "Prophets" being another, [i]they[/i] have set themselves up as the oracles of the Lord, abuse and have actually created their own vocabulary derived from the scriptures to further their vain imaginations and dare to speak these things in Gods stead as God speaking. Nicolations? Draw off the comparisons of these to the article you linked, it's all there.
My only concern and to belabor the point is that of an [i]exchange[/i] on the one hand and where things run together on the other. The two isolated bits from your reply above leave an impression and one that others here might also be concerned with, is what can lead to an island alone mindset and if not careful, pride, loss of a grasp of what constitutes true humility and that word that can strike us sideways - submission to authority.
Do take Robert up on his mention there, it is a very good thread and last I checked was still cordial and very edifying,
Fearing God and not man is plain enough but when it comes to the Brethren who are of your own makeup and ... matter, [i]in spirit and in truth[/i], where a sense of 'authority' is a given, not as a title, it is easy, I want to say 'natural' to give preference one to another. It may be a 'teacher' but it also may be the simplicity of a child - There have been 14 year olds on this site that have shut my mouth and caused me to consider - It is in moments like that where I am indeed being taught just as well.
Who has authority? Anyone with less pride than myself, with more honesty than I have yet to achieve, whose heart, demeanor, proclivities, character, disposition is more knit to the Lord and exemplifies Him, who is Christlike.
Speaking in generalities, the concern again is in flipping this all over and giving rise to a "Me and God" against the world, including our own kind. We would have no need of Paul or the apostles even of the scriptures since they do decidedly teach everything that we need to learn. We could become monk's and live in the desert if this was taken to it's extreme, God being our only teacher. The facts are that the Lord uses each of us to teach each other, even what you are forwarding here is a 'teaching' of sorts, leaning on the error side of things and drawing off of it, exposing it if you will.
Another consideration ... Towards the end of that article;
[i]Then defame and slander their character by adding the charge of anger because those who are passionate about the Word always express emotion sooner or later out of frustration at not being heard so you will always be able to point to some tangible public display of emotion. Oh, never mind that Titus 3 actually defines a factious man as being the one who is introducing destructive and error laden doctrines and who is dividing the fellowship of the church based on improper motives because almost no one is discerning enough in the church to look up the passage on their own, much less properly interpret it in context (hmm, the irony is that while you are falsely accusing the righteous man of being factious Titus 3 actually defines the real factious man as being you). The charge of factiousness itself is sufficient to win the day.
Then, out the door the trouble-making Bible-quoting discerners will go. Most will leave of their own accord anyway, having had enough of their characters being maligned. The few that stick around can easily be sent through a pseudo-church discipline meeting and they too will soon be gone. And since they have nothing they can repent from, they will never return to plague your fellowship again. In fact, this form of ungodly "discipline" might best be characterized by the term "shunning" because its sole goal is to irrevocably destroy fellowship. However, you must never use that term in public because it might draw attention to fact that what you are doing to these innocent individuals really is shunning which is strictly an illegitimate act; we are nowhere called to destroy fellowships but to restore them.[/i]
The way the author of this is playing devils advocate and speaking in a third person sort of way makes this a bit ... tortured if not sarcastic in that manner he is using. It's not an accusation per se but it makes things difficult to unravel. Convoluted. It is to shove all the emphasis on to one side and make even the ones 'quoting bible verses' the righteous ones when they are very often the ones in rebellion, contradicting the very statement made earlier, [i]... dividing the fellowship of the church based on improper motives[/i].
My reason for drawing attention to this is for the same things that even 'we', those of us here under the burden of moderating have met time and again, namely misappropriation. Where we attempt best as we can to be patient and long-suffering, as 'unbiased' as we can (a very, very difficult thing at times), allow many things to go on with the hope of considering and again reconsidering -[i]time[/i] - That great interval of space where things sink down into our fabric and alter us all - All these things and yet we must still keep some order around here and that is where a mindset that is already decided and not to misappropriate it to yourself, is one that will often rise up and thwart these efforts - It is where that word 'shunning' made and always makes me cringe. We have often had no other recourse than to remove some that were overbearing in conduct, more often that not the case and generally speaking, less often over dangerous heresy's and the like. But the accusations have come, threatenings and a whole host of things unprintable even here, things that would amaze and alarm ... but I must tell you that not a one has been 'shunned' even if removed - For a setting such as this the limitations are to what is expressed but it can never paint the whole picture and so even those things leveled or charged must also be taken with an understanding and often enough are cause to reflect even further - Listening to your 'critics' even in their outbursts, the misunderstandings and misappropriations of intent and motive on [i]both[/i] sides, where we have erred and failed ...
Again, it is more teaching and learning.
If I could go back to the 'prophetic' bunch again and maybe give a stark example of the same things you are distressed about, just as I often am - Remember Todd Bentley? There was no small controversy surrounding this whole thing and page upon page was expressed here during this whole upheaval, this whole supposed 'revival', his antics and deploring conduct, the imaginations run amok ... When it all came crashing down and to our credit and in no way boasting, it was largely met with silence. The majority of us grieved and some of us even concerned greatly even for the man, his family, his separation from his wife ...
I still on occasion find myself praying for him and am just as impressed by one simple factor. His silence. It is impossible to read as much into it as out of it but where I have a great problem even still is what became of these so called (many of them) 'apostles' or 'apostolic' ministries that they have appointed themselves as. These same men who came out and put there little stamp of approval, their 'anointing' on Todd and on the whole 'revival' ended up taking this fallacious higher ground and attempted, after the fact, to defend themselves, distance themselves from it all. Whole statements and letters on their 'positions', their best efforts at sincerity and concern for him being washed out with their inability to see just how much their own lack of discernment, their penchant for chucking scripture in favor of "What God is doing" or at best wrenching it all out of context was the very problem in the first place. There where those who wrote long, defending articles in support when it was all so ... exciting and entertaining that fell off a cliff when it blew up. It was and is frankly very pathetic and marries right into these things under discussion - The overt concern was not for the Lords testimony, but self preservation. None of them came completely clean nor admitted frankly, instead gave a wink and a nod to it, lessening and distancing themselves from any responsibility, if not involvement.
What is more alarming? From what I last observed of it all, these same men were to be the ones to restore him? It is ghastly, compounding the error ... Might great prayer is that the Lord would thwart and keep them far, far away from him. I have far more sympathy and hope for Todd Bentley than these self appointed, self 'anointed' - wind bags (Jud 1:12) and I am at once sorry and not so sorry for putting it so crassly.
