Dreams

[GaoLu]

A lot of interesting discussions above. God may not speak to every person exactly the same way or in every way possible. Wiser than to say, God does not speak to people by _____, is to say God has not spoken to me by _______.

 

[Rockson]

If someone is having a vision or a dream and the vision or dream is saying exactly what the Bible says, then what is the point of the dream/vision? If the information is already in the Bible and available, then the vision was unnecessary.

I disagree. God might want to bring something to one's attention fast and quick. A dream could d this. And I'm not taking necessarly about doctrine but directions for one's life.

In the Bible dreams and visions were revelatory, they imparted previously unknown information that wasn't previously known or available.

But again I think you're limiting visions and dreams to doctrinal issues. Most dreams and visions that I see in scripture have nothing to do with that but again direction for one's life. When Josephs has a dream about his family bowing down to him it wasn't doctrinal but rather direction. When the wise men had a dream where an angel appeared to them it wasn't doctrinal...but rather direction. And the list can go on and on.

Since we have the Bible and it is complete, we don't need visions or dreams to tell us what we already have revealed to us in the Bible.

But something you're maybe not appreciating. Some places in the world people might be isolated. Stories have been told of such isolated individuals that when they're finally connected with and shared the gospel they claim they already know. They might claim they've had visions or maybe dreams. Also here's a link to show that Muslims are having dreams or visions of Jesus and they're coming to Christ.

Visions of Jesus Stir Muslim Hearts

 

[GoodTidings]

I disagree. God might want to bring something to one's attention fast and quick. A dream could d this. And I'm not taking necessarly about doctrine but directions for one's life.

That's why we have the Holy Spirit living within us and why we have His Word.

But again I think you're limiting visions and dreams to doctrinal issues. Most dreams and visions that I see in scripture have nothing to do with that but again direction for one's life. When Josephs has a dream about his family bowing down to him it wasn't doctrinal but rather direction. When the wise men had a dream where an angel appeared to them it wasn't doctrinal...but rather direction. And the list can go on and on.

Even if we allow for dreams and visions to be about guidance and direction, as well, again, that's why we have indwelling abiding presence of the Holy Spirit.

But something you're maybe not appreciating. Some places in the world people might be isolated. Stories have been told of such isolated individuals that when they're finally connected with and shared the gospel they claim they already know. They might claim they've had visions or maybe dreams. Also here's a link to show that Muslims are having dreams or visions of Jesus and they're coming to Christ.

Visions of Jesus Stir Muslim Hearts

I am skeptical about those alleged visions.

 

[GoodTidings]

A lot of interesting discussions above. God may not speak to every person exactly the same way or in every way possible. Wiser than to say, God does not speak to people by _____, is to say God has not spoken to me by _______.

Lot's of false teaching gets started when someone claims to have had a vision or dream or something. Visions and dreams are completely unnecessary when we have the completed canon of Scripture and the Person of the Holy Spirit whose task it is to lead us by illuminating the Word of God to our hearts.

The bible doesn't make a doctrine out of dreams and visions. They are recorded as happening, but nowhere are we instructed about them, to expect them to be part of our experience as believers.

 

[Bible Thumpin n Gun Totin]

I had a dream a couple years ago that I was walking in the desert and a vehicle offered to give me a ride if I would consort with some rather loose females in the vehicle. I happily accepted.

Then Jesus appeared in the vehicle and I realized what I had done and was all tore up. I woke up from the dream abruptly and was quite tore up that I even dreamed such a thing. Obviously it had quite an impact since I can still remember it.

Kind of like Peter saying he would never deny Christ, but he did so 3 times.

I would say that was definitely God speaking to me in a dream. I learned that I should never assume how I would react in a given situation and should therefore avoid areas where temptation in the area of lust is possible.

It made me question whether I was a fair weather Christian and also taught me to realize how weak I really am. Being a part time farmer, we kind of think we can fix anything and do for ourselves, but the dream taught me otherwise.

 

[agedman]

Dreams can be extremely beneficial to believers.

Typically they may indicate direct, but are often revealing the inner person.

The believer should never discount dreams, but discern need, an area of weakness, agendas, ... so that extra work by the Word and Spirit bring resolve and peace.

 

[Revmitchell]

Lot's of false teaching gets started when someone claims to have had a vision or dream or something.

This is a logical fallacy known as the "slippery slope" fallacy. It is not a legitimate argument.

 

[Reynolds]

But that is not due to an inability to hear or obey the Gospel. It comes from sinful rebellious condition. Why would God waste His time, in the OT, calling out to unregenerate Israel to return to Him if they were unable to hear Him and respond? Why send prophets to a people who did not have the ability to respond and obey?

Paul didn't say they don't understand because they are unable. He didn't say they don't seek God because they are unable to seek God until God allows them to do so. My point is that you cannot produce a passage that says anything about a person being unable to respond to God unless God makes it possible for them to respond.

But that is not due to an inability to hear or obey the Gospel. It comes from sinful rebellious condition. Why would God waste His time, in the OT, calling out to unregenerate Israel to return to Him if they were unable to hear Him and respond? Why send prophets to a people who did not have the ability to respond and obey?

Paul didn't say they don't understand because they are unable. He didn't say they don't seek God because they are unable to seek God until God allows them to do so. My point is that you cannot produce a passage that says anything about a person being unable to respond to God unless God makes it possible for them to respond.

I Cor 2:14 is pretty definitive on that.

 

[GoodTidings]

I Cor 2:14 is pretty definitive on that.

No, it says nothing about an inability to hear God or the Gospel call. That is not even on the radar in that chapter. Paul's point in that verse occurs in context about the deeper spiritual truths, about how those truths are foolish to the natural man. It says he cannot receive them. It doesn't say that he cannot hear or respond to the Gospel unless he is regenerated. None of this "inability" doctrine is contained in that verse.

 

[GoodTidings]

This is a logical fallacy known as the "slippery slope" fallacy. It is not a legitimate argument.

It's not a slippery slope argument at all. I am stating as fact that a lot of people in the Charismatic/Word of Faith movement claim visions and dreams and use them as teaching tools. They claim to have visions of Heaven and direct face-to-face conservations with Jesus and stuff like that.

No one is obligated to believe that a certain alleged vision or dream is from God, just because someone says it was. They may very well have seen what they claimed to have seen. I don't think they are lying. I am simply under no obligation to accept that it was from God.

 

[MB]

I Cor 2:14 is pretty definitive on that.

Paul was speaking of the deep things of God not the gospel or the milk of the word. All men including the natural man can understand the milk of the word,
1Co 2:10 But God hath revealed them unto us by his Spirit: for the Spirit searcheth all things, yea, the deep things of God.
MB

 

[Revmitchell]

It's not a slippery slope argument at all. I am stating as fact that a lot of people in the Charismatic/Word of Faith movement claim visions and dreams and use them as teaching tools.

You are using it as an argument against believing that God still uses dreams and visions today, so why do you believe stating the abuses of it is important to your position?

They claim to have visions of Heaven and direct face-to-face conservations with Jesus and stuff like that.

Two different things completely. The latter being impossible.

No one is obligated to believe that a certain alleged vision or dream is from God, just because someone says it was.

strawman no one is arguing that.

They may very well have seen what they claimed to have seen. I don't think they are lying. I am simply under no obligation to accept that it was from God.

Again no one says you or anyone else is.

 

[GoodTidings]

You are using it as an argument against believing that God still uses dreams and visions today, so why do you believe stating the abuses of it is important to your position?

True, it one of the arguments I use, but it is not the only one.

Two different things completely. The latter being impossible.

Yes, but they have many people who believe in visions/dreams of this nature and almost always dreams and visions are going to reinforce someone's own theology.

strawman no one is arguing that.

I didn't intend to say that anyone was arguing that fact.

Again no one says you or anyone else is.

Just clarifying that I am not calling anyone a liar.

 

[Reynolds]

No, it says nothing about an inability to hear God or the Gospel call. That is not even on the radar in that chapter. Paul's point in that verse occurs in context about the deeper spiritual truths, about how those truths are foolish to the natural man. It says he cannot receive them. It doesn't say that he cannot hear or respond to the Gospel unless he is regenerated. None of this "inability" doctrine is contained in that verse.

Every bit is covered by it, you simply refuse to see it. I have never held man has to be regenerated to accept the Gospel. I am a C.A. My belief is man had to be in some way called or awakened by The Spirit to be able to accept The Gospel. I do not contend that call is irresistible. I contend it can be resisted. Salvation takes a combination of The Gospel and The Holy Spirit.

 

[Alcott]

No one is obligated to believe that a certain alleged vision or dream is from God, just because someone says it was.

If we have no need for dreams/visions because we have the completed Canon of scripture-- the chief argument against them-- then we are still accepting messages that are from God *because somebody says it is*.

 

[GoodTidings]

Every bit is covered by it, you simply refuse to see it.

I refuse to accept false doctrine. And that verse does not at all cover an inability to hear the Gospel in an unregenerate state. So far, no one who has used that verse has been able to exegete it to prove what I have is wrong.

I have never held man has to be regenerated to accept the Gospel.

It has taken you this long in the discussion to finally getting around to admitting that? I mentioned regeneration in connection to inability several times and you continued this debate without making that clarification until now.

I am a C.A.

I don't know what "C.A." stands for.

My belief is man had to be in some way called or awakened by The Spirit to be able to accept The Gospel. I do not contend that call is irresistible. I contend it can be resisted. Salvation takes a combination of The Gospel and The Holy Spirit.

Jesus said that, as well. He said that no one comes unless they are drawn to Him by the Holy Spirit. I am, in this thread, speaking to the false teaching of inability/regeneration as posted by Calvinism.

 

[Iconoclast]

That was only a partial hardening and not what Calvinists refer to when they talk about the inability of some unregenerate to hear/obey the Gospel. Nothing in the Bible supports this added concept of inability.

And besides, the Bible doesn't use the word "regenerated" to refer to some intermediary state between being unsaved and saved.

It does not seem that you understand some of the verses.

 

[GoodTidings]

If we have no need for dreams/visions because we have the completed Canon of scripture-- the chief argument against them-- then we are still accepting messages that are from God *because somebody says it is*.

I am not sure what you are getting at. What messages from God are you referring to?

 

[GoodTidings]

It does not seem that you understand some of the verses.

What verses are you referring to?

 

[Iconoclast]

I refuse to accept false doctrine. And that verse does not at all cover an inability to hear the Gospel in an unregenerate state. So far, no one who has used that verse has been able to exegete it to prove what I have is wrong.


It has taken you this long in the discussion to finally getting around to admitting that? I mentioned regeneration in connection to inability several times and you continued this debate without making that clarification until now.

I don't know what "C.A." stands for.

Jesus said that, as well. He said that no one comes unless they are drawn to Him by the Holy Spirit. I am, in this thread, speaking to the false teaching of inability/regeneration as posted by Calvinism.

You deny the effects of the fall?are you suggesting Adam was only wounded in the garden?