5-24-13 The Highway of Holiness Part 7B - Testing the Spirit

[Adriel]

Topic is: The Highway of Holiness Part 7B - Testing the Spirits
Happy Sabbath - Please see room details at http://csda-adventistchurch.to/chat.html

Zahakiel : I will ask Bro. Jaime to offer our opening prayer (as translated by Giselle).

Guest_Giselle : Loving Heavenly Father, we thank you for this time of rest, that you have set apart for us, to worship you. We ask you for discernment of your word, and for applying it into our lives. In the name of Yahshua, Amen.

Guest_Giselle : Amen.
Adriel : Amen
Barbli : Amen
Elyna : Amen.
Zahakiel : Amen
Pastor_Chick_CSDA_7 : Amen.
Guest_eagle : Amen.

Zahakiel : Happy Sabbath to everyone. This week, we are continuing to finish our examination and discussion of the Highway of Holiness Baptismal Guidebook. In our previous meeting, we started to look at one of the longer chapters of the second volume, the second-to-last, which deals with evangelism. In a more general sense, this chapter deals with communication. It deals with expressing ourselves clearly, purely, and in such a way as to have our audience receive our intended message.

With regard to the associated principles that this chapter covers, last week we looked at finding our “self worth” based on our relationship with Christ. To truly know who we are – in order to testify to the truth about ourselves – we must understand that we are both worth nothing, and worth an infinite price that was paid to redeem us from destruction. We saw that we must have a pure speech, free of misleading exaggerations, and corrupt expressions. We saw that we benefit greatly from employing such rules of thumb as “I messages” and (though I do not recall if we went into this last week) the distinction between “I feel” and “I am.” We saw that we must be willing to put ourselves into the places of those with whom we are communicating, to see things from their perspective without sympathizing with their sin, in order to reach their hearts. We must speak with grace, neither portraying ourselves as “above” or “below” our hearers, and we must avoid officiousness in our approach.

Today, we are going to finish this chapter, and examine some other concepts to round off our overview of evangelism. The primary issue before us tonight is that of testing the spirits. The Scriptures tell us, “Preach the word; be instant in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort with all longsuffering and doctrine. For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine, but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; and they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables.” (2Tim 4:2-4)

I think it is a very good principle, when reading the Scriptures, to always pay particular attention to those passages that include words like “for,” “because,” and “therefore.” These words indicate not only that one passage is connected to the one below it, but that there is an explanation being given for the instruction or statement.

When we are finished with our examination of The Highway of Holiness, one of the studies I wish to give involves the reasons we obey the Scriptures. We have had studies that have looked at similar ideas before, but there are a few things that bear emphasizing regarding why the commandments exist, and what they tell us about our Father’s character. One of the things our Father wants us to do is to offer Him, as it is written, “reasonable service.” He wants us, as much as we are able, to understand the reasons why He has set the moral law before us in the manner that it is laid out. He wants us to agree with His judgment in all these matters, therefore I always appreciate those verses and passages that explain, plainly, why a statement is there.

So, we look at this passage again, and we might see something significant: “Preach the word; be instant in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort with all longsuffering and doctrine. For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine, but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; and they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables.” (2Tim 4:2-4) Paul tells his student in the faith, Timothy, to preach the Word whenever possible, but then he specifies that this will involve reproving, rebuking and exhorting. Timothy is told not to shrink from either encouraging or correcting the Church’s members, because – and here is the reason – there are temptations out there that will seek to draw away the vulnerable into error; and those who are not settled into the truth so that they cannot be moved, they will follow their desires and meet destruction.

In this generation, with our understanding of the Victory over Sin, we do not give countenance to the idea that any who testify of Christ will “turn their ears away from the truth,” but the principle exists for a reason, to keep us confidently upon the strait, and narrow, and narrowing, road to salvation.

Because of the many errors out there (for there are many errors, but only one truth) the Scriptures have provided us with a way to know what teachers are sent of Yah, and what come forth either from Satan directly, or from their own imagination. We begin with one of the most important errors of which we need to be aware, because, of all the errors in Christendom, it is THE most widespread. If I asked a group of Adventists what the most widespread doctrinal error was, most would probably say it is Sunday-sacredness. Some might say it was ignorance of the Sanctuary doctrine. That minority that knows the teachings of the Pioneers might say the Trinity (because some Sabbath keeping groups, including the mainstream SDA Church, are now Trinitarian).

However, the most widespread error among all groups that claim to believe and teach the Bible has got to be salvation in sin. Even Sabbath keeping groups teach this doctrine. Even non-Trinitarian, feast-keeping, diet-reforming, sacred-name using, advent-believing Sabbath keeping groups teach this doctrine.

The fact of the matter is this: if anyone, whether it is a group, or a teacher, or a so-called prophet, makes ANY excuse for sin in the life of a convert, of a born-again child of Heaven, he or she is not a messenger of Yah.

This is not a new doctrine, this false teaching. In fact, it is the ORIGINAL false doctrine, for Satan said to Eve, “Go ahead and transgress. You will not surely die.” You can sin, and still be counted among the living, Satan says, and every Church, every one that we have found, believes this lie, except for the very and unique Bride of Christ.

In the New Testament, we find the apostle John preaching the Word, rebuking and exhorting to righteousness, those who had fallen under the spell of the Gnostic groups, who taught that one may be saved “in the spirit,” but not in the flesh. No matter what sins one committed, if they were “saved,” then they would inherit everlasting life. This sounds very much like the modern teaching of “once saved always saved,” and that is certainly the direct descendant of this deception, but there are other, subtler ways in which this doctrine has influenced modern Christian teachings. Those who say that we “will” have victory, or “should” have victory, but claim to be presently born again without it, they have fallen prey to this deception. They believe they are alive in Christ, when the Word says that they are “dead in trespasses and sins.” Any group that does not hold, with strict faithfulness, to this explanation of what it is to be “alive” spiritually has been influenced by the same Serpent that first deceived humanity. Test the spirits, and see that it is indeed so.

Other false doctrines are the two-ditches on the side of reform called legalism and licentiousness. True reform involves learning the truth, and following it because we rejoice in righteousness. Legalism follows merely because it is the “legal” act, it is the proper and lawful conduct. Legalism does not go any further than this, because the legalist is not interested in agreeing with Yah. A citizen of a country who is “lawful” is trying to stay out of trouble, but doesn’t necessarily agree with the government. This may sound strange, because we may find legalists who are among the most “obedient” and upstanding of any Christian… but they are interested primarily in avoiding the penalty for sin, and saying within the confines of the law. Nothing at all is wrong with that in terms of its outward appearance; however, if one merely obeys because that is what the Law says, he will not come into true, mental and spiritual agreement with Yah, and the character will not become Christ’s own character.
On the other hand, if we focus only on what we perceive “character” to mean, and try to be “a good person” with no respect to the fact that the Commandments and other laws were given for a reason, we will similarly fail to attain the perfection of nature that Yahshua exemplified.
Those who are licentious believe that their inward goodness, and their desire to worship Yah, gives them “license” to disregard the law, and we certainly see this in many modern groups. They say, “I am Christian, the law does not apply to me.” However, they cannot be Christian apart from the law, for Christ Himself authored, upheld, and died to glorify, that Law. The Scriptures say, speaking of Christ “the Seed,” “If His children forsake my Law, and walk not in my judgments; if they break my statutes, and keep not my commandments; then will I visit their transgression with the rod, and their iniquity with stripes.” (Psalm 89:30-32)
This simply could not be clearer. Although it is an “Old Testament” passage, it is speaking of the New Testament, where those who follow the “Seed of God” are subject to obedience to the Father’s Law, Commandments, Judgments, Statutes, etc. Of course, in other studies we have examined some aspects of the Mosaic covenant that have not endured into the new one, but Commandments (the Decalogue), Judgments (the principles of Yah’s character) and Statutes (which the concordance defines as “limits,” that we would apply to such things as clean and unclean meats) have nothing to do with the system of Mosaic sacrifices and national religious instructions. We can test the spirits, then, by seeing first how it responds to the concept of victory, and then to the concept of balanced, but faithful, obedience to Yah’s Law.
There are also tests that we can apply to “special messengers,” or prophets. The mainstream SDA Church has nine “tests of a prophet” that they apply to anyone coming with a claim of inspiration. These nine tests are listed in the Highway of Holiness, and if you are interested in looking those over and discussing them tomorrow during our open chat session, feel free to do so. What I will say for our summary tonight, however, is that I have a major problem with the way these tests are applied.

First of all, the way these tests were constructed is a serious problem, because they were established with one particular individual (Ellen White) in mind. SDA writers looked at the signs of the prophetic gift that Mrs. White displayed, and then went looking in the Scriptures for support, to prove the legitimacy of these experiences.

Second, we have very little information about the personal lives of the Biblical prophets. We simply do not know, nor CAN we know, if all nine of these test elements were active and present in the life of every prophet. In fact, we know for certain that they did not, thus invalidating the test right off the bat.

For example, one of the tests the mainstream Church applies, No. 2, is that a prophet will have “visions and/or dreams.” However, John the Baptist, whom Christ referred to as one who came in the very spirit of Elijah, and is named as a prophet, and even the greatest of prophets, in Luke 7:28, never spoke of either a vision or dream of spiritual significance.

John’s prophetic gift was understanding the Scriptures, and having spiritual vision to recognize the truth (and the Messiah) when it was presented before him. Yah spoke to John through his conscience and his spirit, Yah spoke to John through his conscience and his spirit, but if John the Baptist appeared before the head elders of the SDA Church and told them to prepare for the coming of Christ, they would get out their list, start reading, and reject the messenger because John did not display all the signs that their artificial standard (Mrs. White) did. Of course, this is not to take anything away from Ellen White’s ministry. What this IS saying is that prophets, as individuals, are all different. They have different gifts. Not all have dreams or visions. Not all “lose their breath” when they prophecy (test number 3) –in fact, ONLY Mrs. White ever had an experience like this that I'm aware of. The verse from which they try to draw support from this, Daniel 10:17, does not mean that he stopped breathing for any supernaturally long length of time. It simply means that the vision he saw temporarily, as we say it even now, “took his breath away.” Right before that, Daniel says his “strength left him,” but one of the OTHER tests of a prophet indicates that Ellen White held a very heavy book parallel to the ground for a significant amount of time while in vision.
Clearly, these tests are almost entirely arbitrary, and without merit when applied as a “standardized” test of an inspired speaker. So, what are the tests of a prophet that the Bible indicates must always be true for every messenger? There are some, after all, or we could not be instructed to “test the spirits,” and test the messengers.

Well, I would propose that there are three, rather than nine, that must always be true; and the other manifestations listed by the mainstream SDA Church may or may not exist to provide additional evidence.

1) A prophet’s words must be “reliable.” Even outside of directly inspired utterances, they will speak with integrity, reflecting the character of Christ and the principles of righteousness. They will speak of victory over sin. They will uphold the perfect standard of Yahshua at all times. They will rebuke, reprove, correct and encourage, and their words and actions will incline those who hear them Heavenward.

2) A prophet’s words will be based on inspiration. This does not always have to be direct inspiration. John the Baptist spoke forcefully by quoting the Old Testament scriptures. Many of Christ’s own words were those spoken to, or by, Moses and His previous messengers. Ellen White borrowed from writers that came before, as she saw in them Biblical truth that properly expressed the mind of Christ.
› Sandiie has joined the conversation.

Zahakiel : Direct inspirations may come, and inspired writers may quote others, but what is constant is that the words will always reflect the proper principles, and their proper application, that Yah intends. We, who are students of the Word, are instructed to KNOW these principles, so that we can hold those who claim to come from Yah up to inspection in the light of Heaven.

3) A prophet’s words will be fulfilled if there is no significant spiritual change in the hearers. This is a bit different, and much more accurate, than the mainstream SDA test that a prophet’s predictions must always “come true.” That is NOT a proper test, because we understand the nature of conditional prophecy. Jonah’s prediction of the fall of Nineveh, Isaiah and Elijah’s predictions of the enduring faithfulness of Jerusalem, Ellen White’s prediction of a National Sunday Law…none of these are “false” prophecies. None of these speakers are false prophets, but the nature of the fulfillment of these predictions is subject to the spiritual state of those unto whom the prophecy was delivered.

We are also instructed to test the spirits of those who, while not claiming to be prophets, come to us as teachers. We here consider evangelists, missionaries, and those who put out publications such as newsletters and Internet sermons in an attempt to instruct others in spiritual things.

I have listed five characteristics of what an evangelist will do.

1) They will speak reliable words, just as a prophet, because the source of the message will be the same even if the method of delivery is different (a teaching vs. a directly inspired declaration). The evangelist will speak reliably, “rightly dividing the word of truth.” (2Tim 2:15)

2) They will claim to be acting on behalf of the Father and Son, and expect to be received as such. (Mat 10:40) They will speak with confidence, and they cannot be taken off their “script” as we often observe with Jehovah’s Witnesses or Mormon missionaries. These “trained” teachers are given a set of statements and responses; and while these may be useful for someone just getting involved in face-to-face evangelism, there must also be a freedom and grace that comes from simply living in the Spirit, and speaking with Its power.

3) They will urge faith and heartfelt repentance, declaring, “The day of Christ is at hand.” (2Th 2:2) They will not be speaking primarily of changing habits and actions (although these may certainly arise in conversation) but of coming to know Yahshua, and preparing, in all ways, for His soon return.
4) They will be in agreement with light that has come before. Now, this does not mean that they may not correct common misconceptions, (we do this all the time, when speaking of the Sabbath) this will be toward restoring an original, and proper, teaching. So the fourth test is, being in harmony with previous light, although this does not exclude correcting common errors. Of course, those being corrected will not initially know that their understanding is wrong; so it does take an open mind to receive a messenger and to accept a new teaching.

Finally, 5) they will promote unity with the Body of Christ, and not division. They will speak of baptism, and the covenant of Christ. They will desire to draw others into unity with them. It is generally true that any messenger will adopt this approach; however, in many cases it is the Church or the Organization that is of primary importance, not the fact that these are merely outward signs of a relationship with the Savior that is established at the point of conversion. Another way of looking at this fifth point is that they will be able to properly explain what conversion is, and how baptism relates to this inward, spiritual transformation. These, then, are some of the tests of Yah’s messengers. Of course, false doctrines do change over time in the way they are expressed, one of the clearer examples being the transformation of Gnosticism into the faulty “Once Saved Always Saved” version of the Gospel. However, the principles of deception, just like the principles of truth, remain constant, and as we pray for and receive the Spirit of Truth, and the Spirit of Discernment, we need never hold any concern for going out into humanity, meeting those who need to hear the truth, and bringing it to them with power, and with love.

Now, with those things in mind, if you have any questions or comments, feel free to share them now.

Pastor_Chick_CSDA_7 : Q
Zahakiel : Go ahead.

Pastor_Chick_CSDA_7 : Did YAHSHUA tell a lie when He said He was not going to the feast? END.

Zahakiel : This is related to the list of "tests" given above?

Pastor_Chick_CSDA_7 : It is related to the character of YAH.
Lucan : A
Zahakiel : Go ahead.
Lucan : He said "I am not going to this feast yet," and then stayed in Galilee till after His brothers left. I don't see how it would have been a lie. <end.>

Adriel : C
Zahakiel : Go ahead.

Adriel : What verse is that?...
Zahakiel : John 7:8

Adriel : I didn't think He said "yet"

Zahakiel : "Go ye up unto this feast: I go not up yet unto this feast; for my time is not yet full come."

Adriel : Thanks

Pastor_Chick_CSDA_7 : 8 "Go up to the feast yourselves; I do not go up to this feast because My time has not yet fully come." 9 And having said these things to them, He stayed in Galilee. 10 But when His brothers had gone up to the feast, then He Himself also went up, not publicly, but as it were, in secret.

Zahakiel : Did you want to follow up on Bro. Luke's answer, pastor?
Pastor_Chick_CSDA_7 : I did not understand the "yet" to be significant to the meaning (as the NASB shows it).
Zahakiel : According to the concordance, "not yet" is the idea there...
Lucan : C
Zahakiel : Go ahead.

Lucan : There's some discrepancy in the source texts. The Alexandrian / Egyptian texts omit "yet," whereas the majority contains it. That's why some translations have it and some don't. <end.>

Pastor_Chick_CSDA_7 : C

Zahakiel : Right, but that word is used in places where "yet" is necessary for a proper understanding. Other verses are those like, "Don't let your heart be troubled, as you will see wars and rumors of wars, but the end is not yet." There's a time factor. Go ahead, pastor.

Pastor_Chick_CSDA_7 : I am wondering why He would say... I am not going yet, because My time has not yet come. (which means)... I am going later because my time has not yet come...Then, He goes secretly. (something does not make clear sense to me in that). END.

Lucan : C
Zahakiel : Go ahead.

Lucan : Well, Ellen White uses the "yet" version in Desire of Ages... she says that His reasoning for going secretly was that had He attached himself to any of the caravans (which presumably His brothers had done), it would have brought attention to His entrance.

Pastor_Chick_CSDA_7 : A

Lucan : He came at the half-way point and avoided the public at large. I'm not sure He was trying to convince His brothers that He wasn't coming at all; just avoid the public eye. <end.>

Zahakiel : That is what I understood as well. It says in a later verse that the Jews were looking for Him, which would have prevented Him from moving about freely and interacting with people. Go ahead, pastor.

Pastor_Chick_CSDA_7 : She used the "yet" because it was in the KJV... my question would be... Did his brothers expect Him to go to the feast (and that, "later")? END. (Was His communication clear to their understanding.)

Lucan : A
Zahakiel : Go ahead.

Lucan : I don't think we have any record of how they reacted to His statement to know. <end.>

Pastor_Chick_CSDA_7 : C
Zahakiel : Go ahead.

Pastor_Chick_CSDA_7 : I believe most people have understood that Christ did not want his brothers to know that He was going to the feast, because He intended to be incognito. Is that not what Sis. Jody was thinking? END.

Adriel : A
Zahakiel : Go ahead.

Adriel : That is what I was thinking as it says he went up secretly. Though I didn't remember reading the word yet. End

Pastor_Chick_CSDA_7 : C
Zahakiel : Go ahead.

Pastor_Chick_CSDA_7 : I do not see YAHSHUA saying... I'll be along later, but don't tell anyone that I am coming. I want to attend secretly. (that would have been the clear communication)... Of course, they would not have understood Him because they were not spiritually discerning... My initial question was, Did He tell a lie?... To me He might have been misleading because to be very clear about His plan could have left His cause/plan vulnerable. END.

Zahakiel : I recall we had a similar discussion about this some time ago...

Pastor_Chick_CSDA_7 : I do not recall it (does anyone else?)

Zahakiel : There were other examples we looked at, such as Rahab lying to the guards about the Hebrew spies. This was back when Jeannie was attending meetings with us, so it was some time ago.

Lucan : C
Zahakiel : Go ahead.
Guest_Giselle : c.

Lucan : Vaguely, yes. I remember the example of Yahweh telling Samuel to say "I am going up to sacrifice" when he was going up to anoint David king was brought up. I think some of the Israelites military exercises might have come up, too; things where Yahweh told them to split the group, draw the people out of the city after them, and then the ones lying in wait behind would come in. <end.>

Zahakiel : Go ahead, Giselle.

Guest_Giselle : I have a question, not really a comment. If Yahshua told to his brothers the actual words, of what he was planning to do, wouldn't those words sound like fear, to those who didn't have spiritual discernment, and have caused them to misunderstand his reasons. Certainly he had important reasons to avoid public display but his brothers may have not understood him, and possibly become a stumbling block to their understanding? His ministry could be in risk, and the time had not come to show himself in public display. it seems to be like "life" was more important. But I am not sure. End

Barbli : C
Zahakiel : Go ahead.

Barbli : I do not remember the discussion Bro. David is mentioning, however, I remember a discussion that was not public that included Rahab. ... In that scenario, it is as Giselle is saying - preserving life was more important than the truthfulness of the words. It was necessary for a purpose. End (in the scenario of Rahab) C

Barbli : C
Zahakiel : Go ahead.

Barbli : Oh, when I have watched the video of the Gospel of John, the words we are mentioning have really stood out to me. And I have wondered, also, if that was technically a lie. End

Guest_Giselle : c.
Zahakiel : Go ahead.

Guest_Giselle : It seems that something can be truthful but not necessarily accurately, word for word. End

Barbli : C
Zahakiel : Go ahead.

Barbli : It seems that it was necessary for Him to say this to preserve perhaps His life until His time, and potentially spiritual life of others. What do you think? End

Pastor_Chick_CSDA_7 : C
Zahakiel : Go ahead.

Pastor_Chick_CSDA_7 : So, this is about character, righteous motive, etc. and not about "legalism"...What man perceives on the surface may LOOK like something that is off or even a transgression, but YAH looks on the heart, and man looks at the appearance. END.

Lucan : C

Zahakiel : I would agree with that. Of course, that is something that could be easily misused. Go ahead, Luke.

Lucan : I don't think there is actually a Biblical injunction to not tell an untruth, as much as it's ingrained as a moral standard. The commandment is to not "bear false witness against thy neighbor;" that is, to your neighbor's hurt or loss. The verse that seems to come up more often is "in their mouths was found no guile..." That's often taken to mean "any shade of untruth or deception." That's not really a sustainable definition. We named a number of examples earlier where Yahweh used at best "misdirection," which is certainly a shade of deception... Yahshua repeatedly told His disciples to "tell no one" of who He was, the miracles He had performed, etc. when Peter says "in his mouth was found no guile." Every place I find "guile" mentioned, it's in the context of putting forward a false pretense to do someone malice. Deceiving them to hurt their souls, mislead them from truth, etc. It doesn't seem to be a question of technicalities as much as motive. <end.>
Zahakiel : Well, there is verse that says "Lie not to one another." That is pretty clear But, that is speaking of converts, and it is not likely that one who is born again would misuse any information, so there wouldn't be a need to mislead for any cause. In the cases cited, it's not only a matter of motive, but the one that is being told something. They are generally not right in their understanding, and might therefore come to harm, or do harm, with what they would learn. So that is something to consider here as well. End
Pastor_Chick_CSDA_7 : C
Zahakiel : Go ahead.
Pastor_Chick_CSDA_7 : I think I am satisfied with the consensus, but the church has been, for the most part, silent (which does concern me). END.

Guest_Abraham : C
Zahakiel : Go ahead.
Guest_Giselle : C.

Guest_Abraham : To my mind it is quite simple... Yahshua says to his brothers I am not going up to the feast...My time is not yet... This does not preclude that he would be coming later.

Adriel : (right)

Guest_Abraham : but the time is undisclosed. End

Zahakiel : Go ahead, Giselle.

Guest_Giselle : I was reading a chapter about Ruth, in Holy Kisses book, and a statement from a demon got my attention "what weapons they (humans) give us with their words"...and there is a bible quote that says, we will be judge for every idle word, well I believe Yahshua was being careful not to say words, that could become a stumbling block for those who don't have spiritual discernment, or who would not understand his motives. So he was careful. end.
Zahakiel : For Bro. Abe, What you are saying is the proper understanding of His words from our perspective of reading the full record. What pastor was pointing out is that His brothers are not likely to have understood that...

Guest_Abraham : ok

Zahakiel : and so what we were discussing was the "righteousness" of allowing them to come to a faulty conclusion. To let them "have" their self-deception. And what Bro. Luke was saying about a right understanding of guile was to address that idea. End

Pastor_Chick_CSDA_7 : (Thanks for that concise summary.)

Zahakiel : Any others with something to share about this issue?

Elyna : C
Zahakiel : Go ahead.

Elyna : To me it is simple also, He said I go not.... my time to go has not yet come. Do we know what SOP says also on that passage?... There is wisdom in all that has been said however. End.

Zahakiel : From what Bro. Luke mentioned above, The Desire of Ages discusses it from the perspective of those who were looking for Yahshua at the feast, not really from the perspective of His brothers. I do not remember anything she said about that, specifically. End
Pastor_Chick_CSDA_7 : A
Zahakiel : Go ahead.

Pastor_Chick_CSDA_7 : I just remembered something... from my deposition with the GC attorneys... They asked me a direct question, not recalling the exact question... something about, Would you take down the sign if...?... I pretty much KNEW what I would do because of righteous principle... BUT, because I knew they were seeking to trap me... I answered by saying...I would have to pray about that and see what YAH tells me to do. END.

Zahakiel : Right, I remember that. Any others? All right, if not, then I will ask pastor to close the meeting and discussion with a prayer.

Pastor_Chick_CSDA_7 : Dear Father in Heaven... Thank you for Your inspiration and guidance in all that we do... I pray that our lives will be ennobled with Your wisdom, so that we may have the "correct" words to share with all who come into our sphere of influence... May we always remain "faultless" before Your Throne... In the precious and holy name of YAHSHUA, AMEN!
Barbli : Amen
Adriel : Amen
Zahakiel : Amen.
Elyna : Amen.
Guest_Giselle : C. Amen
Guest_Abraham : Amen.
Guest_Daphna : Amen
Lucan : Amen
Guest_Gadriel : Amen.
Guest_PETER : Amen