But eveyone thought they were drunk...

[Gerald Creasy]

(Yeah, I know -- the analogy needs work, and I am certain Ray will be on this one like white on rice...)

Personally. I think it's more like people eating slop with the hogs.

Oh it's so good! Oh it's so wonderful! Look at that Pig go! HA! Ha!

And they look at you when you tell them that's not real food: their faces covered with slop and mud and pig poop and say: "Your're crazy! You're just mean! What do you know you're clothes don't have mud on 'em? Isn't the warmth of the mud wonderful?

[THE RAzEr]

I think it is crucially important to realize the context of the drunkenness perception. Pentecost was a Jewish festival (by another name) celebrating first fruits. Every Jewish man over 20 was required by the Torah to attend. They were solemn, studious, and devoted days. And, they were days in which the morning prayers were followed by drinking wine and eating bread as part of the festival. To see these people, these 120, among whom some or all probably were participants in the thoroughly Judaic festival complete with its customs, observances of the Law, etc., proclaiming this message in different languages but at the same time, would reasonably cause onlookers and passers by to question if they had imbibed in a bit too much of the morning wine and bread. There is ample historic study to support this view, and no scholarly study of note to support a sort of "shoutin' service" environment of this gathering. These were serious people acting seriously. From this context, Peter arose and spoke seriously and directly, and with warning, of sin, judgment, redemption, and the practical meaning of the messages of those foreign-language speakers (those speaking in tongues). Everything about this is a solemn occasion, met with fear by those who believed, and repentance.

There is absolutely no comparison to the "drunkenness" of charismatic carrying-on and the "drunkenness" of the day of Pentecost. There is more of a comparison, in my view, to charismatic "drunk-in-the-Spirit" behavior and what goes on in a juke joint.

I agree. However, we have no proof either way. Peole react differantly. The actions of 120 people were not the same. some may have danced. It would have not been unusually fo them to do so. Some were more than likely praising god for they had done so for ten days. It would seem foolish for them to stop after the blessing had come. i do not think it unusual to think they blow a shofar or two.. It woulf not surprisa me if there was quite a bit of joy. in the context of the Jewish Festival, this would have not have breen unusual when the drinking of the wine and the eating of the bread started.

Somehow there were 'cloven tongues" like as of fire which appeared upon eaxh of them. We do not know how it appeared. it may or may not have been seen by each. It appears to me I am hungry right now. I can not see it. It appears to me I am Bon Again. I can not see it. But can I say they did not see something. No, I can not.They was a sound as of "amighty rushing wind". I personally believe this was the "joyful noise" the Scripture tells 'all ye lands" to make when you come before the Lord with gladness.

The true joy and Manifestation of the Spirit on the Day of pentecostal does not diminish with abuses. The true joy of the manifestations of the Spirit tody do not deminish with abuses.

So, I agree with you. It seemed to the on lookers that not only had the 120 started the party, but some of them already needed a designated donkey guider.


Ray

[THE RAzEr]

This passage does not support all manner of excess however much it may resemble a drunken stupor.

Do you find it as odd as I do to have some seem to suggest that we are somehow against the genuine presence, indwelling and manifestations of the Holy Spirit because we are calling for the exposure and repudiation of the false, man-centered, show-biz substitute?

It's just crazy.

I tried to think of a comparison, and it's hard to come up with an accurate one, but...

Let's say somebody opened a fuel station, and announced "COME GET SOME!" They had a beautifully equipped place, people were lined up for hours to get to the pumps... the liquid was almost the right color, smelled almost like gas, and sort of made the vehicle run... but there was something just not right. The stuff was not gas at all, and would cause severe damage to engines if used instead of gas... but you could COME GET SOME, and others were raving about it. They knew a man who used it and got great mileage, and it didn't ruin HIS engine.

Anyone who said, "You know, I don't feel good at all about putting that source of power in my vehicle... I'll stick with gas, thanks... and by the ay, YOU should be careful what you're putting into YOUR tank, too!" was thought of as an enemy of the new move of fuel-source-technology, and labeled as suspect.

(Yeah, I know -- the analogy needs work, and I am certain Ray will be on this one like white on rice...)

It is not me who supported the excess of anything. i have never once supported Bentkey or his revival on this Forum. I do not think you support the idea, that the 120 were vomiting or laying in urine. yet i could make it appear you do since you are supporting gerald's view point.

Who is excessive here. I have heard NO ONE expose the idea that for someone to belive the disciples were percieved drunk, that they had to be wallowing in filth and perversion. MO ONE that is except Gerald!

So there. Jump on me like lke white on Grits 'cause I am a Son of the South!

[Shellie]

Gerald wrote:

Personally. I think it's more like people eating slop with the hogs.

Oh it's so good! Oh it's so wonderful! Look at that Pig go! HA! Ha!

And they look at you when you tell them that's not real food: their faces covered with slop and mud and pig poop and say: "Your're crazy! You're just mean! What do you know you're clothes don't have mud on 'em? Isn't the warmth of the mud wonderful?

I haven't commented on this Todd Bentley topic simply because I think ya'll are beating yourselves to death to no avail. Some people just have "blind" belief in anything that looks and feels good and calls itself godly. Pitifully, I think it is because they are so desperate and hungry for a move of God that they accept any move as "of God." And that's really quite sad. In looking for great "moves" of God, they miss God's gentle, still moving in everyday lives.

I don't have to prove that I have faith in God's supernatural ways by believing everything that presents itself as such. Nor does not believing in such make me a skeptic. Maybe it just makes me a good discerner.

Anyway, Gerald, the analogy that you used here is probably the best I've heard thus far. I do wish though that we could point out the mud without kicking the pig.

[THE RAzEr]

(Yeah, I know -- the analogy needs work, and I am certain Ray will be on this one like white on rice...)

Personally. I think it's more like people eating slop with the hogs.

Oh it's so good! Oh it's so wonderful! Look at that Pig go! HA! Ha!

And they look at you when you tell them that's not real food: their faces covered with slop and mud and pig poop and say: "Your're crazy! You're just mean! What do you know you're clothes don't have mud on 'em? Isn't the warmth of the mud wonderful?

Gerald man, You've had some experiences. Never have I seen this, and I live in Louisville, KY, but even more amazing I have traveled through TN several times.

So on the Day of Pentecost the if the 120 were suggested to be drunk bythe on lookers, they had to be laying in their own urine, in mud and poop, eating slop with the hogs,------------ wonder what the crowd would have said if they would have know these mud/covered covered slop eaters might just eat the hogss when Paul got to 'em.

You are hilarious.
Ray

[THE RAzEr]

Time and time again I see the excuse "everyone thought they were drunk" in relation to the excess and abuses in the name of the Spirit.

If activities while drunk is the standard then lets add a few more: laying in your own vomit, urinating on your self, beating on your wife, fighting total strangers.

If you claim THIS IS RIDICULOUS, I agree it certainly IS.

BUT REMEMBER YOU have set the standard "things drunk people do" to justify wildfire excesses in Pentecostal services.


WHAT standard SHOULD be used??

Gerald,
Seriously,

You say time and time again you have heard people use the "they were drunk' anlogy. Then later you say set the standard.

I suppose you are referring to someone on the board.

I think your post is hilarious, but I am trying to be serious here.

I think the Standard is not set by any person on this board, in Louisville, KY, Cleveland, TN, Tulsa, Ok, or Lakeland, FL. and certainly not by me. It is set by The Holy Ghost. When h the Spirit of Truth has come Hsahll lead you and guide you into all Truth. Even the Scripture owes its authority to the Holy Ghost. So the Scripture purports the idea about the "they were drunk".

Who is the YOU who is distorting the Day of Pentecost on this board in the manner you have said? Could you point to where they did so over and over.

I think you have some of us mixed up with Todd Bentley. Until last night, I had never even seen his face, or heard his voice. However, I just had to, because of YOU Gerald. You keep Todd Bentley's ministry alive and well on JUDE2. You convince people to get on the Web and watch this guy. Do you not know this?

Ray

[Gerald Creasy]

Gerald man, You've had some experiences. Never have I seen this, and I live in Louisville, KY, but even more amazing I have traveled through TN several times.

So on the Day of Pentecost the if the 120 were suggested to be drunk bythe on lookers, they had to be laying in their own urine, in mud and poop, eating slop with the hogs,------------ wonder what the crowd would have said if they would have know these mud/covered covered slop eaters might just eat the hogss when Paul got to 'em.

You are hilarious.
Ray

Man, Ray this topic must really rile you up. You've posted on this thread more than anyone.

I know it's hard to keep up, but the pig analogy was A DIFFERENT topic than the drunk discussion. The different topic was made by Pastor Gary and his analogy on gas.

You have taken Topic B and applied it to Topic A.

[Brian]

I personally don't think Gerald meant to imply that the 120 in the upper room where covered in urine. I think his point was larger than that. Let me explain....(Gerald, if I'm wrong clear it up)

Many people today who are involved in all these Toronto, Bentley, gold dust type of manifestations will very quickly try to set the record straight by using the Pentecost account of seeming to be drunk as a defense for all there crazy wild and erratic manifestations they call spiritual. They would quickly say "hey, don't look at that girl clucking like a chicken as odd, don't you know the disciples acted drunk at Pentecost and we all know how wild and crazy we have seen drunks act". They use it as a defense for acting like a bunch of crazed monkeys! What I think Gerald is trying to do is say "what is the gauge we are to use as acceptable behavior? or is there a gauge at all? (as some of them try to imply)

Should the manifestations be a no holds barred display of behavior?

Should a person be allowed to do or say or teach any manner of craziness all under the guise of it being a move of God with no accountability?

Thats why we have the Spirit AND THE WORD to properly keep us balanced as to not be led away by the flesh and the lusts therein.

No on....NO ONE should be above question an accountability. If your word and testimony is true then the inquiry from others should be welcomed, not condemned.

God bless

[THE RAzEr]

Gerald man, You've had some experiences. Never have I seen this, and I live in Louisville, KY, but even more amazing I have traveled through TN several times.

So on the Day of Pentecost the if the 120 were suggested to be drunk bythe on lookers, they had to be laying in their own urine, in mud and poop, eating slop with the hogs,------------ wonder what the crowd would have said if they would have know these mud/covered covered slop eaters might just eat the hogss when Paul got to 'em.

You are hilarious.
Ray

Man, Ray this topic must really rile you up. You've posted on this thread more than anyone.

I know it's hard to keep up, but the pig analogy was A DIFFERENT topic than the drunk discussion. The different topic was made by Pastor Gary and his analogy on gas.

You have taken Topic B and applied it to Topic A.

Excuse me. I didn't know Gary jumped the topic of the thread. I still don't Gary.

I thought gary was talkiing about the poat you stared about drunks. Maybe not! Comparing to excwesses.

I even thought Gary made it clear, I might take issue with his analogy. Gary if I am wrongI am sure yo can jump in hear like yellow on the inside of a Pineapple.

So stink it up Gerald. You like it straight. your analogies about puke, urine,. poopslop mud,pigs, ect, to those who would try to worship God are not apreciated. It has nothing to do with Brentley, Copeland, Hinn are a host of other people who do not frequent this board. It has to do with whoever YOU (referrence to your fisrt post on this thread) is.

Gerald fess up! Who are you calling Vomiting, urine soaked, pooped/mud covered, slop eating, excessive Pentecaostals. Could it be SATAN! I hope, cause it sure ain't me.

You can post it and i can answer it. Ain't that the way it works.

I don't agree with you. And I am not referring to Bentley, and the crowd you are so fond of watching, reading after, and posting about ad nauseum.

Your post do not rile me as much as they nauseate me. However, often they make me laugh!

[THE RAzEr]

I personally don't think Gerald meant to imply that the 120 in the upper room where covered in urine. I think his point was larger than that. Let me explain....(Gerald, if I'm wrong clear it up)

Many people today who are involved in all these Toronto, Bentley, gold dust type of manifestations will very quickly try to set the record straight by using the Pentecost account of seeming to be drunk as a defense for all there crazy wild and erratic manifestations they call spiritual. They would quickly say "hey, don't look at that girl clucking like a chicken as odd, don't you know the disciples acted drunk at Pentecost and we all know how wild and crazy we have seen drunks act". They use it as a defense for acting like a bunch of crazed monkeys! What I think Gerald is trying to do is say "what is the gauge we are to use as acceptable behavior? or is there a gauge at all? (as some of them try to imply)

Should the manifestations be a no holds barred display of behavior?

Should a person be allowed to do or say or teach any manner of craziness all under the guise of it being a move of God with no accountability?

Thats why we have the Spirit AND THE WORD to properly keep us balanced as to not be led away by the flesh and the lusts therein.

No on....NO ONE should be above question an accountability. If your word and testimony is true then the inquiry from others should be welcomed, not condemned.

God bless

You are right! He wasn't trying to say that about the 120. He was trying to say it about the YOU he mentioned in his post. Those who he has read "over and" talkinf about"drunk". (which is in the Bible he does respect. He was talking about somebody. It does not particularly matter who it was.

If i called him are you for that matter by name and said what he said it would br wrong. yet if you don't call the name, but just play hit and run tactics, it is alright. i do not agree, and i never will. I am sraight up about this.

My brothers and sisters o this board are not laying in urine, pooped covered, slop eaters just because they have manifestations in the Spirit that are differant from Gerald Creasey's.

He is setting a standard NO ONE, but himself has set!

Ray

[Gerald Creasy]

You are right! He wasn't trying to say that about the 120. He was trying to say it about the YOU he mentioned in his post. Those who he has read "over and" talkinf about"drunk". (which is in the Bible he does respect. He was talking about somebody. It does not particularly matter who it was.

If i called him are you for that matter by name and said what he said it would br wrong. yet if you don't call the name, but just play hit and run tactics, it is alright. i do not agree, and i never will. I am sraight up about this.

My brothers and sisters o this board are not laying in urine, pooped covered, slop eaters just because they have manifestations in the Spirit that are differant from Gerald Creasey's.

He is setting a standard NO ONE, but himself has set!

Ray

As always it dosent take long for you to decend into absolute lunacy.

It is MADNESS to say that BECAUSE "things people do when they are drunk" is NOT the standard then the standard has to be what I personally have expereinced.

The "well, you know, people do weird things when their drunk" is the excuse I have heard ALL MY LIFE from various churches, various states and even televison ministries.

You have too. You're just too consumed with your personal vendetta to admit it.

[Brian]

My brothers and sisters on this board are not laying in urine, pooped covered, slop eaters just because they have manifestations in the Spirit that are different from Gerald Creasey's.

Ray

Hey Ray, look man, I have no problem with you at all. From what I have read from you you are a straight forward guy and seem to be fairly level headed. However, if you or anyone else for that matter are clucking like a chicken, quacking like a duck, slithering on the ground like a snake, barking like a dog, catching gold dust (glitter) from the vents, jerking like an epileptic, then the chances are pretty good that you might as well be peeing and pooping on yourself while eating slop out of the pig trough! I think I can say with a pretty good amount of confidence that those aren't true manifestations of the Spirit of God.

Not throwing stones at you brother, just wanting to say that I believe that just like all areas of our spiritual walk that we should use wisdom.

[THE RAzEr]

My brothers and sisters on this board are not laying in urine, pooped covered, slop eaters just because they have manifestations in the Spirit that are different from Gerald Creasey's.

Ray

Hey Ray, look man, I have no problem with you at all. From what I have read from you you are a straight forward guy and seem to be fairly level headed. However, if you or anyone else for that matter are clucking like a chicken, quacking like a duck, slithering on the ground like a snake, barking like a dog, catching gold dust (glitter) from the vents, jerking like an epileptic, then the chances are pretty good that you might as well be peeing and pooping on yourself while eating slop out of the pig trough! I think I can say with a pretty good amount of confidence that those aren't true manifestations of the Spirit of God.

Not throwing stones at you brother, just wanting to say that I believe that just like all areas of our spiritual walk that we should use wisdom.

And I agree. The fact is though, I do not agree with trying to say someone on this board has exposed a Standard whish says, if theses were percieved drunnk, YOU have purposed the 120 had to do everything aany drunk would do.

The scriptures teach the people supposed them drunk or at least that the Holy Ghost thought it of worthy mentiomn in the Scriptures. If I believed anyone one this board was setting a "Standard" like Gerald says the illusive YOU has set, i would say so, but NO ONE has even hinted at such that I have heard.

If there are people who do such things, I have not heard any one support such on this board. However, I heard of two guys taking a walk on water one day. I did hear of one preacher spitting on clay and putting it on a man's eyes. It wern't poop, but it was mud!

I've said my piece. I appreciate the dialogue.

Ray