Bill Johnson Seminar

[fuego]

Personally I don't care what its chemical composition was and don't need to have it examined to know that it was God. Cuz I recognize Him when I see Him...

Well, that's basically my point. The doubters get hung up on the actual composition and stuff because of what it is called, and that would be their way of proving whether it was God or not, depending on whether it was real gold or not.

[Kay]

Well, that's basically my point. The doubters get hung up on the actual composition and stuff because of what it is called, and that would be their way of proving whether it was God or not, depending on whether it was real gold or not.

I think if I was sitting here at my computer typing a grocery list or coding php and I got something glittery on me, I'd say, "hmmmm". (Note: this has never, never, never happened)

But if I end up on the floor in the glory and ecstasy of God... woah wow hooooo
I surely will recognize that the state I'm in when I pick myself up off the floor is His doing...

[krystian]

'God dust'

Typo....or not?

[fuego]

Typo....or not?

Freudian slip with the fingers.

[Karsten]

I think some get hung up with terminology, especially when the discussion goes to it being tested scientifically. 'God dust' is just the term most use because that's what it looks like. I don't think anyone is saying it is real gold (maybe they are) but I don't think of it that way. It is what it is, whether it is gold or just looks like gold. But using that term, I think many expect it to be real gold, when it may or may not be. But whatever it is, it appears supernaturally.

Well, you could always try the "blue sapphire and diamond glitter from heaven" in the video marketed by Patricia King. You can buy the videos to see it .....

Terminology can definitely be important.

When peolple say "gold dust," instead of "it resembles gold dust," there is a difference.

And actually, the reports I read of Ruth Heflin said she claimed a "gold nugget" was deposited supernaturally. Someone said she claimed on Sid Roth's program that she had her "gold dust" tested and it was "gold."

Others stated that the "gold dust" proved to be common glitter, made-made material. It burned up when fire was applied.

[Kay]

Well, you could always try the "blue sapphire and diamond glitter from heaven" in the video marketed by Patricia King. You can buy the videos to see it .....

Might have to do that.

Your point would be what, exactly?

[Firebrand]

Well, you could always try the "blue sapphire and diamond glitter from heaven" in the video marketed by Patricia King. You can buy the videos to see it .....

Terminology can definitely be important.

When peolple say "gold dust," instead of "it resembles gold dust," there is a difference.

And actually, the reports I read of Ruth Heflin said she claimed a "gold nugget" was deposited supernaturally. Someone said she claimed on Sid Roth's program that she had her "gold dust" tested and it was "gold."

Others stated that the "gold dust" proved to be common glitter, made-made material. It burned up when fire was applied.

If the twinkly gold colored flakes can stand an assayers test....then dump a whole truck load in our offering basket.

Otherwise, if it's more like glitter I'm rejoicing anyhoo....because it is supernatural.

[Kay]

because it is supernatural.

There t'is.

[Karsten]

Are you credible? You're just some guy on the internet, after all.

Well, shucks, I guess I am just a common, ordinary bloke. I make no pretense, .... You are welcome to check me out if you wish, ... but I'm not the one claiming extra-biblical miracles, am I????

Now tell me, are we engaged in a debate over an issue, or is this about me personally? If the former, then let's stay away from Ad hominem fallacies. My credibility is irrelevant to the issue of false prophecies and sensational claims of materializing "gold dust," feathers, gemstones, and stigmatta.

On the other hand, the credibility of those making the claims of extraordinary experiences and materializations is relevant to the debate. When certain people promoting these manifestations are videotaped faking them or caught planting the materials, it becomes a significant part of the discussion. Does that prove that everyone is faking them? No, it doesn't. However, it should motivate us to closer examination and inspection.

In regard to credibility, do you place your trust in everyone who says "I am a prophet"? Do you believe everyone who says, "I have a word from God for you"?

When a person claiming to be a prophet makes false prophecies, why do most Charismatics go silent and ignore them and pretend they never happened?

Doing a quick search on Ruth Heflin, it seems that she is more famous for her prophecy that Jesus would physically appear on the platform in Benny Hinn's crusade than she is for her "gold dust."

Transcript from This is Your Day
"Ruth Heflin: the Lord spoke to her recently, and she called my wife and told her to tell me, that Jesus said to her, that He will appear physically on the platform in one of our crusades. [Harald Bredesen] My! [Benny] She said, 'Tell Benny, that the Lord told me, that He is going to appear physically, on the platform, and the crowds will see Him, on the platform.' [Harald Bredesen] Jesus! [Benny] Dear God my hair is standing up! [Harald Bredesen] Praise God! [Benny] It may very well happen in Nashville!" - Benny Hinn.

Do these bother you at all???

"The Spirit tells me - Fidel Castro will die - in the 90's. Oooh my! Some will try to kill him and they will not succeed. But there will come a change in his physical health, and he will not stay in power, and Cuba will be visited of God." - Benny Hinn.

"The Lord also tells me to tell you in the mid 90's, about '94-'95, no later than that, God will destroy the homosexual community of America. [audience applauds] But He will not destroy it - with what many minds have thought Him to be, He will destroy it with fire. And many will turn and be saved, and many will rebel and be destroyed." - Benny Hinn.

Now, I understand that the heresy hunters distort and take things out of context, putting a different spin of particular statements of those they attack, but these do seem to be accurate quotes. How do you explain them????