Do you hear "still small voices"?

Phil Johson, Carl Trueman, James White on “mysticism”

No Compromise Ever #2

9341 reads

There are 71 Comments

J Ng's picture

Woohoo, interesting discussion, bound to ruffle a few feathers among the psychically (I didn't say schizophrenically) inclined.

Anyways, just commenting on the title of the topic, it would seem in the context that the "still small voice" in 1 Kings 19 refers ultimately not to any inner voice or impression (as hath been said of [recent] old) but the faithful remnant of 7,000 Yahweh worshippers in Israel. Through a double 4-series pairing multimedia phenomena (earthquake, fire, tornado, and a "still small voice" puff of air) with prophetic propositions (commands to go anoint 3 people and revelation of a hitherto unknown remnant), the Lord responds to Elijah's lament that put himself, as sole patriot, at the centre of things with a backhanded rebuke.

So perhaps rather than "hearing" the still small voice, we should endeavour to be found as and among that oft-overlooked still small voice.

Anne Sokol's picture

I hate the way people present this topic. 

Because, while I believe in sola scriptura, i don't agree with the premise that this host states,

that: "“If God talks to you then the Scriptures are deficient.”

 

Does this bother anyone else?

I will be back after I listen to more. 

Anne Sokol's picture

what do you think about questions of conscience, for example?? that God will not show you what He wants you in particular to do? 

Is that God somehow communicating through the Holy Spirit to His child? And it is not saying that the Bible is not sufficient at all. 

J Ng's picture

I think what the panel were saying was basically what's often claimed as God talking is really you talking to yourself.

And the onus to assert otherwise if difficult to back up.

 

Anne Sokol's picture

can and sometimes does communicate to us on a private level. and yes, this is a very "dangerous" thing to say, but i think it really doesn't mean that the Bible is insufficient.

for example, God *convicted* me very clearly that I needed to forgive someone. I mean, it was not audible, but it was very clearly stated, like You need to forgive XX. 

Also, God *convicted* me in  different way that I needed to give money to a refugee. And I really felt that if I did not do it, I would be harming the work of the Holy Spirit in me. 

I also started midwifery school, but I didn't have any *conviction* that is was God's imperative will for my life at that time. . . . 

What I am saying is that I think God has, at times, somehow clearly communicated things to me that are not black and white written in the Bible. I don't think these things should be sought or even spoken about, but I think they do happen. And saying that God will never do this, I feel men are putting muzzles on God in ways they are not allowed to do. 

And yes, I say this knowing that this issue can be very abused, but I dont think that means it's off limits for God to do. 

Anne Sokol's picture

having charismatic acquaintances, even friends, who I think are a little too out there and off track, looking for meanings in every remembered dream, etc. So Im not being naive about how this is abused. 

Anne Sokol's picture

around minute 34, the man tells a story about how the Spirit specifically led him to talk about a particular subject in witnessing to a mormon--just like what i am describing. 

and well shew for me, they say as long as we dont call it revelation or a miracle or a prophecy, it's OK and what God does. They call it a "remarkable providence." 

Wink

 

J Ng's picture

Anne Sokol wrote:

around minute 34, the man tells a story about how the Spirit specifically led him to talk about a particular subject in witnessing to a mormon--just like what i am describing. 

and well shew for me, they say as long as we dont call it revelation or a miracle or a prophecy, it's OK and what God does. They call it a "remarkable providence." 

 

I'm okay with saying God showed me the way in a very loosy goosy way in those circumstances because we don't know how it might have turned out if he'd used his usual evangelistic apologetic--James White it was, I believe. He was basing it on a felicitous outcome--but what if he'd done it differently and the guy gets baptized the same day? So, while there's an assurance that God foreordained and governs and guides our lives in some sense (making us do of His good pleasure even), I'm not sure we could attribute all our impulses--all our apparently good ones even--to Him. Lacking 20/20 vision and infallibility, we need certain disclaimers.

As for things that the Spirit helps us understand in the Word or reminds us of, can't we reclaim the use of the term illumination? I believe its definition disclaims the infallibility and inspiration that attach to terms like inspiration and prophecy.

The other thing is to use the passive voice or to take personal responsibility for particular impulses and inclinations. E.g. I felt concerned for this situation, I was led to believe such and such, I have been burdened to share whatever. This kinda leaves the agency open, which isn't terrible if we want to avoid dragging the Lord into what may turn out to be not quite true later on. For instance, can't we all remember pastors and leaders who've proclaimed, "The Lord showed me this would be the ministry/calling for me for the rest of my life" only to see them move on to some other "Lord showed mes" a few years, or even months, later?

Anne Sokol's picture

i personally have had to learn to discern if what I am feeling/thinking/hearing is the Spirit or not. 

 

I have had to do this a lot in regards to my conscience especially. I think with time and experinece and deep saturation in the word of God, a person learns the level of seriousness or source of these types of communication. 

J Ng's picture

Anne Sokol wrote:

i personally have had to learn to discern if what I am feeling/thinking/hearing is the Spirit or not.

We all have had to do that. It's tempting in all religions to claim divine involvement for the numinous.

But I think we do need to hold ourselves to a higher standard who are blessed for not seeing and yet believing (what is already revealed), who have the sufficient Word in our hands, who have the illuminating Spirit as we read and meditate upon that Word.

Quote:
I have had to do this a lot in regards to my conscience especially. I think with time and experinece and deep saturation in the word of God, a person learns the level of seriousness or source of these types of communication. 

Ah, conscience. That's something I think should be considered apart from the Spirit's direct work of convicting the world of sin, righteousness, and judgment. Conscience is one's sense of guilt or innocence in respect of one's knowledge of what's right, and both that sense and that knowledge are subjective and fluid. Rather than to attribute one's feelings directly and hastily to the Spirit, I suppose we could just attribute them to "conscience" or "how I feel is."

Chip Van Emmerik's picture

Anne Sokol wrote:
i personally have had to learn to discern if what I am feeling/thinking/hearing is the Spirit or not.
This topic pops up from time to time on SI. I ask the same questions every time. Where is the biblical example of an inner prompting? Where is the biblical command to seek/exercise such a prompting? Where are the biblical directives on how to identify and interpret these inner promptings? They are nowhere to be found, because God never has communicated this way and never indicates He will communicate this way. These promptings meet none of the biblical directions associated with Divine communication; they are entirely human in origin.

Why is it that my voice always seems to be loudest when I am saying the dumbest things?

Anne Sokol's picture

watch the video from about 33:45 to 38:15 and tell me what you think about "remarkable providence."

 

 

Chip Van Emmerik's picture

Anne,

Be careful not to read into the conversation what you want to hear. First, I have read all three of these men on this topic, so I am familiar to one degree or another with where they come down on it. My understanding from all three is that they do not accept the notion that God communicates with men apart from scripture. This should be evident from the initial exchange they have about the sufficiency of scripture.

 

In the section you highlight, they speak of providence, and specifically deny it is a miraculous event they are speaking about. By definition, providence indicates God's working within the natural laws of the universe, whereas, a miracle is God's temporary suspension of the natural laws and working outside of them. This providence they speak of is simply God orchestrating events as the Sovereign of the universe to accomplish His purposes. As Johnson says, God is providentially at work in all things at all times. It is decidedly not a reference to some special communication from God according to the discussion. That's why they all agreed that this is not something you can seek out from God, nor is it something you can determine before hand is even from God, nor can you even determine definitively afterwards that is was providence at work.

 

I don't have time to watch the entire 90 minutes of the video, but I watched the entire section you marked and significant sections throughout. I did not see anything in the discussion other than various aspects of exactly what I said in the earlier post (#52480).

Why is it that my voice always seems to be loudest when I am saying the dumbest things?

Anne Sokol's picture

I'm not talking about anything "miraculous" either. I just think it's normal. 

I think the Scriptures are sufficient. I think it has nothing to do with the sufficiency of Scripture issue. 

So, let's take this man's example: 

He was witnessing to one particular mormon, and got the distinct "impression" or "leading" to talk about archeology, something he would never ordinarily do. And turns out the man was an archeologist. 

So, I really find it hard to say that this was "entirely human in origin" as you say it must be. I think the Holy Spirit led him very specifically. 

i wouldn't call it a miracle. I see nowhere that this is an attack on Scripture sufficiency. However, I think it was a type of personal communication by God's Spirit. Call it a "remarkable providence." 

I know of several examples of this type of thing occurring. I am not disturbed by it. 

I will give you another example--a friend (and I can give you her name, phone, FB contact) was in her house with guests over and she suddenly has this very insistent thought or command that she must go look in her pool. She would never have otherwise gone. She goes, and her adoped Chinese child is at the bottom, drowning. They were able to save her. I don't think it was "entirely human in origin." I am not threatening the sufficiency of Scripture by thinking that God communicated this to her, either by angel or His Spirit. I dont even call it a miracle, as such. 

Yes, I am disturbed by my charismatic friend who tries to read for God's meaning into her dreams. Yes, it's weird when sitting in a leaders' meeting with my pentacostal pro-life friends and we pause for 20 minutes with bowed heads waiting for God to give us visions--and they shared them! I was the only baptist Wink Sure it bothers me when a binge drinking charismatic guy regularly visiting our church says he "by faith" went through our 6-month rehab program. 

But "remarkable providences" don't bother me. 

I don't really like how these men handle this question entirely however. 

J Ng's picture

Anne Sokol wrote:

I will give you another example--a friend (and I can give you her name, phone, FB contact) was in her house with guests over and she suddenly has this very insistent thought or command that she must go look in her pool. She would never have otherwise gone. She goes, and her adoped Chinese child is at the bottom, drowning. They were able to save her. I don't think it was "entirely human in origin." I am not threatening the sufficiency of Scripture by thinking that God communicated this to her, either by angel or His Spirit. I dont even call it a miracle, as such. 

Speaking hypothetically and not trying to be insensitive to the situation at all, had the child not been discovered till too late and the town repented at the funeral, would that have been Providence?

Basically, which part of the lives of Romans 8:28 God lovers is not providential?

It is providence when our gut feel turns out right; and it is providence when it turns out wrong, I say. Same God, same providence, same promise. So we're to rejoice evermore, pray without ceasing, give thanks in everything.

But to expect "just that little bit more" of divine guidance ... I dunno. Seems to separate Christians into the haves and have-nots of some extrabiblical treacle.

Anne Sokol's picture

how this could even be doubted. Does not God specifically lead us into His will for our lives in individual ways? Are we saying the Scriptures are insufficient if I'm praying and asking God what college to go to or if I should marry X or not, knowing already that the answer is not written on the pages of the Bible? 

Anne Sokol's picture

J Ng wrote:

Speaking hypothetically and not trying to be insensitive to the situation at all, had the child not been discovered till too late and the town repented at the funeral, would that have been Providence?

Basically, which part of the lives of Romans 8:28 God lovers is not providential?

It is providence when our gut feel turns out right; and it is providence when it turns out wrong, I say. Same God, same providence, same promise. So we're to rejoice evermore, pray without ceasing, give thanks in everything.

But to expect "just that little bit more" of divine guidance ... I dunno. Seems to separate Christians into the haves and have-nots of some extrabiblical treacle.

It was her family's personal pool. 

i think that is one of the keys, she wasn't  asking or expecting it. God could've worked differently, sure. 

Greg Linscott's picture

Ann,

 

Not to make light of your scenario, because it is serious- but how is that different from when you have young children, and it grows strangely quiet, and you have a "mother's intuition" moment when you just know it's too quiet and you get up to find that little junior is ____________________? 

Would your perspective change at all if some unbelieving parent described the same kind of thing?

Do we hold God as actively responsible for sudden, traumatic deaths as we would sudden rescues?

I think one could be thankful to God in the situation you describe without necessarily concluding that God communicated to her in direct fashion. For that matter, the story probably doesn't end with the rescue. God uses trials to teach. I imagine your friend's awareness of where her child is (not to mention the ability to access the pool) probably changed to some degree after that.

Greg Linscott
Marshall, MN

Anne Sokol's picture

Biggrin

would you also like to explain away the pastor's impression to witness using archeology? . . . surely the man must've been carrying a stack of architectural drawings which the pastor saw out of the corner of his eye . . . been wearing a compass and protractor decorated tie . . .

I don't think it's worth talking about with you all. But I don't mind going on the record saying that I have no problem with these "remarkable providences," and it's hard to talk about them because they are usually private, and I have no conflict in the sufficiency of scripture area. 

Another example of this type of thing, George Muller's autobiography:  

The reader of the former volumes knows, that in October, 1830, I gave up my stated salary, as pastor and minister of the Gospel, and that, since then, I have had neither as pastor of a large church, nor as director of the Scriptural Knowledge Institution, any salary, stipend, or fixed income at all. Nevertheless, God has put it into the hearts of some of His children, in almost all parts of the world, to remember my temporal necessities, and to send to me, entirely unsolicited, help in money as well as in clothes or provisions. . . . All this abundance I received simply in answer to prayer. For I have neither directly nor indirectly asked for anything for myself from man, since October, 1830.

Was it entirely of human origin that they gave to him when he never solicited? Or this: 

Now, as I do not consider it sinful to have some money, until I clearly see, how God would have me to use it for Him, as I am only His steward; and as I had no clear light how to use it; I continued waiting on God, and not long after received light, and gave in one donation £980. 9s. 7d. for the Missions of the Scriptural Knowledge Institution....

Greg Linscott's picture

In Mueller's case, it is an evident answer to prayer. God works through the prayers of His people.

Greg Linscott
Marshall, MN

Anne Sokol's picture

that God "moves" people through prayer--but how? 

I think fundamentalists or evangelicals or whoever, really have a wrong approach to this question. For one thing, I don't think you have to say that every communication or movement of God in a personal way is canon-type communication. Lumping the discussion under sola Scriptura is probably not even what Luther was referring to when he said that phrase. 

anyway . . . 

Chip Van Emmerik's picture

Anne Sokol wrote:
I'm not talking about anything "miraculous" either. I just think it's normal.
But Anne, definitions matter; that's why I included them. What you are describing is miraculous because it is outside the laws of nature. And it is an attack on the sufficiency of scripture. Scripture claims that it provides God-breathed communication to man and provides all that is necessary to make "the man of God may be competent, equipped for every good work.” (2 Timothy 3:17 ESV) What you are describing is also supposedly God-breathed, but is also necessary to equip the man of God for some specific good work. Negatively, it contradicts and undermines the clear teaching of scripture about the scriptures and about the biblical understanding of God-breathed communication (most significantly inerrant though you could go through a whole laundry list of characteristics that apply to scripture but do not apply to these extra-biblical communications). Positively, the idea has no support or evidence to support itself anywhere in scripture. 

 

Query: If we are supposed to accept your position purely on the basis of anecdote, why are you unwilling to accept your charismatic friends' positions on the same basis? I am sure they can provide you with names, phone numbers and facebook contact lists of people who will tell personal stories of how God spoke to them in a dream or vision. I think you have argued against yourself without realizing it.

Why is it that my voice always seems to be loudest when I am saying the dumbest things?

Chip Van Emmerik's picture

Anne Sokol wrote:

how this could even be doubted. Does not God specifically lead us into His will for our lives in individual ways? Are we saying the Scriptures are insufficient if I'm praying and asking God what college to go to or if I should marry X or not, knowing already that the answer is not written on the pages of the Bible? 

emphasis added

Very perceptive - you have hit on one of the core issues. And the answer is no, not outside of the providential outworking of His plans, which He does not reveal to us ahead of time. The answers are already written in the pages of the Bible, where God provides all the principles we need to make decisions that honor and glorify Him within the realm of freedom He has provided humanity since the very creation. If you believe God has to give you an answer about the college your are supposed to attend and provides individualized leading about decisions, why don't you go to Him for the individual plan in everything? Either God has an individualized plan, which has to account for every detail of life, or He doesn't. It cannot be both ways.

Why is it that my voice always seems to be loudest when I am saying the dumbest things?

Chip Van Emmerik's picture

Anne Sokol wrote:

that God "moves" people through prayer--but how? 

I think fundamentalists or evangelicals or whoever, really have a wrong approach to this question. For one thing, I don't think you have to say that every communication or movement of God in a personal way is canon-type communication. Lumping the discussion under sola Scriptura is probably not even what Luther was referring to when he said that phrase. 

anyway . . . 

Sorry, I have been away from the discussion. I am not trying to pile on, just working my way through the thread. On what basis do you decide which communications of God are cannon-type communication and which are not? What are the characteristics of a non-canon-type communication from God - how does it differ from the canon-type communication? You have yet to provide any biblical basis for your argument, only anecdotes. I appreciate your willingness to flesh out and work through what you believe. What you are describing is not unique in fundamental circles. Pastors and laymen alike use this type of thinking/terminology all the time, though it is thankfully on the wane. I would strongly recommend "Decision Making and the Will of God" by Garry Friesen as a way to think through the issue biblically. 

Why is it that my voice always seems to be loudest when I am saying the dumbest things?

J Ng's picture

Chip Van Emmerik wrote:

I would strongly recommend "Decision Making and the Will of God" by Garry Friesen as a way to think through the issue biblically. 

Hey, long time no see! Oldie but goldie. But talk about a perfect storm in the Fundamentalist world when it first came out--which may have been part of a tsunami in the larger, evangelical world, but I wouldn't have known then.

For the most part, it seems, Friesen's work's been rejected in Fundamentalism, large tracts of which still expect and brandish scripture talismans for this decision or that, whether picking out a mission field (suddenly door-opening verses pop up), switching seminaries, building a church annex, marrying a particular person, whatever.

It often goes like, "The Lord gave me [no] peace about it," followed by "This morning He gave me a verse for it," which is inevitably sealed with pastoral nods and well wishes from the congregation.

Well, can I throw in a thought? Could Agabus and Paul both have been wrong? Sure, they were living in the pre-canon, Apostolic period. But what if they'd had their conversation last Sunday afternoon?

Anne Sokol's picture

Chip Van Emmerik wrote:

But Anne, definitions matter; that's why I included them. What you are describing is miraculous because it is outside the laws of nature. And it is an attack on the sufficiency of scripture. Scripture claims that it provides God-breathed communication to man and provides all that is necessary to make "the man of God may be competent, equipped for every good work.” (2 Timothy 3:17 ESV) What you are describing is also supposedly God-breathed, but is also necessary to equip the man of God for some specific good work. Negatively, it contradicts and undermines the clear teaching of scripture about the scriptures and about the biblical understanding of God-breathed communication (most significantly inerrant though you could go through a whole laundry list of characteristics that apply to scripture but do not apply to these extra-biblical communications). Positively, the idea has no support or evidence to support itself anywhere in scripture. 

Query: If we are supposed to accept your position purely on the basis of anecdote, why are you unwilling to accept your charismatic friends' positions on the same basis? I am sure they can provide you with names, phone numbers and facebook contact lists of people who will tell personal stories of how God spoke to them in a dream or vision. I think you have argued against yourself without realizing it.

 I don't know, I dont have the sufficiency and inerrancy issues with this that you do. I don't even thing you have to know about it for it to exist. if it hasn't occurred to you, that is fine Wink I don't think these things, that I am talking about, are things that others need to know about really, or that we should use it as a sign of something special at all. And knowing charismatics, I dont think i'm talking about necessarily the same thing. The child-drowning lady goes to a church by a BJ-grad pastor, so she's not expecting stuff like this. 

I just see that there are personalized ways that God somehow communicates things to an individual child. My BJ friend once said that he heard a BJ teacher saying that when you look for God's will about something, go back and examine how He's shown you His will in the past. So I did that, and I saw that whenever I had to make a life-altering decision, God did 2 things 1) He gave me an overwhelming desire that was not fulfilled for a while and 2) a moment of conviction from the Holy Spirit would come where I would know that this is what I must do. 

For example, I wanted to be a missionary for years, years, years. I finished college, . . . went to grad school, worked for 2 years afterwards. At all those junctions, i desperately wanted to leave for the mission field. I had every imaginable open door. I even applied to various boards . .. but every single time, I would come to a point where God would just somehow but very definitely in a quiet knowing communicate to me that this was not His will for me, and I would be sinning if I kept further on this path. 

... then, one day I opened my email and read a letter from a BJ grad asking or someone to come teach English, and that very particular conviction came to me that this was God's will for me. I consider this a ministry of the Spirit to me. (It has nothing to do with you.) 

And I look back on this now, and I see that my entire life today depended on that exact ordering of my steps. 

I used this pattern with marriage then, too. And I asked God very specifically for this sense of conviction, and I waited months and fasted a lot. And He did give it. But I don't use this anymore at this time in my life, having a husband to work these things through with.

Now, I am giving you only one example. I will also tell you, my parents are BJ grads, I have never had hooey-hooey influences on my life, I went to the Wilds for pete's sake Biggrin And how was i saved? As a child, i remember praying often to ask God to save me. But one day I was home alone working quietly, and these words distinctly came into my head, Anne, you need to be saved. So I knelt down and asked God to save me, and that was the moment I grasped or had given to me saving faith. And I never told anyone else about it for over a year. It didn't occur to me to tell even my parents. I have told this testimony, for one, in Mount Calvary BC in Greenville, SC, and no one, no one ever anywhere, ever mentioned it was an "entirely human experience." That it must have been the fruit loops I had for breakfast. Smile ... Call it remarkable providence. 

The thing is, I dont expect God to do that. I dont tell others that anyone should expect God to do that for them. That is crazy. God didn't have to do it for me. it's just what he did. I dont consider it in the realm of authoritative in the way the Bible is. 

This is why, for me, these types of issues are not sola scriptura issues. 

But sure I understand why it could be. I mean, I live in the same town as Sunday Adelaja, pastor of the largest charismatic church in Europe. and the number of believers generally is so small here, it's like a village knowing each other's business sometimes. ;) 

I do have a problem with demanding, expecting, teaching, elevating "personal communication from God." calling it prophesy, revelation, vision, telling other people God's will for their lives and money, speaking as though God has communicated canon-status stuff to you. 

Chip Van Emmerik's picture

Anne Sokol wrote:
I just see that there are personalized ways that God somehow communicates things to an individual child.
Anne, you have filled your response with anecdotes again. Where is the scripture that teaches this? The examples? The directions? The warnings and correctives? The limitations? Why is this "inspiration" not a sola scriptura issue; why is it different from the cannon? If God has an individual will, why doesn't it extend to every part of life? If we have freedom in some areas to do whatever, why doesn't that extend to every part of life? Why does God only direct certain decisions but use the sufficiency of scripture to direct others? Why was it a good way to make decisions before but not anymore. You had scripture, but that wasn't enough. What changed according to your account was now having a husband. So a husband is sufficient but not scripture? I don't believe that's where you intended to go with this, but that's what you have related here. You say you don't expect this special communication, but the stories you related were expectations - you were waiting for God to lead you to the right mission opportunity and the right husband. I think this is an important conversation for Christians to have, but it has to focus on scripture rather than the feelings and anecdotes. I grew up right where you are on this - fundamental Baptist Christian school and college. I never really looked at the scripture behind decision making until I read Friessen's book. Give it a read and work through the scripture; see if it's accurate.

Why is it that my voice always seems to be loudest when I am saying the dumbest things?

Greg Linscott's picture

...just observing that people have "deja vu" kind of moments or similar times where parents will say, "Hey, wait a minute... where's my kid?" I know we've had more than a few of those times over the course of our seven, and will likely have more as time goes on...

I'm not even going so far as to say that your impressions and so forth that you describe as a voice in your head don't happen in some way or another. People respond and conceive of things differently. I don't talk out loud to myself, but some people do, for example- and it doesn't mean that they're crazy or anything, but perhaps they are trying to organize a list of ideas or something. What I may think and describe as a moment of inspiration or sudden impulse, you articulate as a voice, maybe even a distinct one.

Such impulses may be even be used of God. The level of subjectivity, however, should make us hesitant to identify the experience as authoritative. The story of how you met your husband, for example- I would describe it as wrestling and deliberating, accompanied by appropriate prayer. In the end, though, would you have been disobedient to God to have been more "impulsive" and just have said yes to his proposal at the beginning?

A sense of confidence is great, and when it comes from a heart of submission to God and compliance with His commands, it is truly a wonderful experience. But if we over-emphasize the experience, what can end up happening is people rely on their impulses rather than the basis of revelation God has provided. I have heard firsthand anecdotes somewhat similar to yours, for example, but with people justifying how God was leading them to divorce their spouse. I have people tell me about how God sent a particular bird outside their window to remind them of a deceased relative or loved one.

The experience may not be completely irrelevant, but it must not be the basis for why we forge ahead. Our confidence rests in the promises of God.

Greg Linscott
Marshall, MN

Anne Sokol's picture

greg, i would be interested in your deconstruction of the pastor in the video clip --starting at 34:45, i think. and yes, i agree with your reservations and people making sinful choices. 

although, i have an acquaintance dealing with the tragic death of her 2 yo, listening to her grief, and who knows, maybe God sends a bird to comfort them . . . ? 

Chip, I don't have much more to say really, i could try, but . . . I don't think this is a topic you want to talk about. yes, there was one time i waited for that sense of conviction because the guy said that God often deals with us in a pattern in how He reveals His will, that's all. and I am in a personal relationship with God while i was doing it, not a demanding one. He leads His sheep. 

Greg Linscott's picture

although, i have an acquaintance dealing with the tragic death of her 2 yo, listening to her grief, and who knows, maybe God sends a bird to comfort them . . . ?

Does God provide sunsets for one specific person? Again, I'm not saying a bird can't be a source of comfort. I would strongly hesitate to assure someone that it was God's intent to personally deliver said bird to that person, any more than I would assure someone God had Paul write Romans 8 just for them in their personal time of need. 

I'll see what I can do about the review. 

Greg Linscott
Marshall, MN

Pages