May 5, 2017
It’s all yours today…
April 16, 2014
March 15, 2010
April 9, 2016
I went out of my way to refute johanna michaelsen and I think I done it!! Time well wasted !
this is of interest to me. Can you give further details about what transpired. Where and when did this occur? Why did you decide to do it?…etc…
Thanks ahead for anything you can share.
(I will check back later in the day.)
A Personal Relationship with Christ?
This week a small kerfuffle broke out on Facebook over an article by a Christian blogger challenging the evangelical notion of a “personal relationship” with Christ. I think Scripture does portray a personal relationship with Christ, but I’m not sure it’s the one evangelicals think it is. Here is a brief sketch of what I see as a Christian’s “personal relationship” with Christ:
(1) As Saul approached Damascus, a light from heaven shone around him. “And falling to the ground, he heard a voice saying to him, ‘Saul, Saul, why are you persecuting me?’ And he said, ‘Who are you, Lord?’ And he said, ‘I am Jesus, whom you are persecuting.’”
As far as we know Saul previously never met Jesus nor directly persecuted Him. But Saul did persecute His Christians. That, Jesus took “personally.” Persecuting His Christians is the equivalent of persecuting Jesus, as far as He is concerned. That is a “personal” relationship.
(2) Paul, admonishing the Corinthians wrote: “Do you not know that your bodies are members of Christ? Shall I then take the members of Christ and make them members of a prostitute? Never! Or do you not know that he who is joined to a prostitute becomes one body with her? For, as it is written, ‘The two will become one flesh. But he who is joined to the Lord becomes one spirit with him.”
When a Christian engages in sexual immorality, Jesus takes it “personally.” Christians are “joined” to the Lord, and shall not join Him to a prostitute. That is a “personal” relationship.
(3) Because the Corinthians were not honoring Christ in their practices concerning Holy Communion, Paul wrote: “Whoever, therefore, eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty concerning the body and blood of the Lord. Let a person examine himself, then, and so eat of the bread and drink of the cup. For anyone who eats and drinks without discerning the body eats and drinks judgment on himself.”
When Jesus offers you His body and blood in Holy Communion, He takes it “personally.” Holy Communion is the most intimate and sacred service that Christ offers His Christians. No other relationship is as “personal” as the relationship between Christ and His Christians enacted in Holy Communion.
So, yes, I do believe Christians do have a “personal” relationship with Christ. “For as many of you as were baptized into Christ have put on Christ.” That’s personal!
Here is what I found
1) Stanley Krippner, who was mentioned in her book said his friend Montague Ullman had visited the same psychic and tested the blood and guts from the surgery and they were from animals. This was from a personal email I had with him. As well a Mexican skeptic, Mauricio-José Schwarz I talked with claimed even during her Hayday Pachita was accused of using animal parts
2)Also the musician *Charles Mingus had visited the same psychic johanna had worked with for a cure for ALS. There was no evidence that the surgery had taken place, no marks no scratches, not one drop of blood. Also the psychic kept on prescribing quack diets and Mingus died a few months after seeing the psychic. Page 107, Better Git It in Your Soul: An Interpretive Biography of Charles Mingus, 2016, Krin Gabbard
3)Also the origin story the psychic told Johanna and the director Alejandro Add to dictionary contracts each other. Page 122 of Beautiful Side of Evil by Johanna Michaelsen vs The Dance of Reality: A Psychomagical Autobiography (Magic Masters Shamans) Alejandro Jodorowsky
4)Johanna claimed that there was a magic light on page 92 of her that allowed her to see all surgeries super clearly but other visitors claimed it was so dark they couldn’t see anything at all. Even quacks like Alberto Villido as well as people who accompanied Andrjia Puharich claimed it was too dark to really see anything and that all sorts of fraud could have taken place.
5) Her own testimony that she gives as presentations sometimes contradicts her book.
6) This one is a little silly but I found someone online who asked Hal Lindsey who wrote the forward to her book and asked Hal about Johanna’s story and Hal was apparently very vague about it. sustainedreactiondotyukudot/topic/5840/The-Death-of-Charles-Mingus?page=1
7) Her (step?) children seem to promote not only Yoga (she rallies against Yoga all the time) but appear to support progressive websites like Daily Kos (Social justice is of the devil!), suggesting that those with behind the scene knowledge aren’t convinced of her truth
8) Another lunatic “scientist” Jacobo Grinberg claimed that Pachita the psychic Johanna Michalesen worked with can spawn organs for transplant OUT OF NOTHING. While Johanna claimed Pachita needed to buy them from the local morgue. Is it a power that Pachita needs to save up mana to use?
9) There is another lunatic Scientist in Memories of a Maverick, the biography of Puharich that claimed Pachita the psychic did a BRAIN TRANSPLANT. Which basically means she brought a dead guy back to life, so what was so special about Jesus coming back from the dead then huh?
10) She STLL promotes SRA 20 years after its been debunked, and as well claims to be an “expert” on the occult despite pushing lies like on the origins of Halloween, Rammerstein causing the columbine massacre etc….
11) She claims that tumors cut out of patients smell like rotting meat, but even large cancers don’t always have a smell comparable to rotting meat. Not even if they do have extensive necrosis. And the size that a “psychic surgeon” handles is small enough to be palmed by him (this is a close up setting) is not what would be considered a large cancer which would be prone to extensive necrosis.
good work, Tony… we’d do well to run from any “manufactured” supernatural occurrences and anyone connected with them – the O.T. relates quite a few that are not produced by God and they were always condemned…
I actually have more but I can’t confirm validity of those facts easily so I am leaving them out
Just in case there’s any confusion…
Here’s a list of pre-existing conditions (there are more!) covered by Obamacare but now very much in doubt with TrumpCare (actually, the money in the bill just passed in the House will cover 110,000 out of an estimated 2.2 million individual policies in the individual marketplace:
AIDS/HIV, acid reflux, acne, alcohol or drug abuse with recent treatment, Alzheimer’s/dementia, anorexia, anxiety, arthritis, asthma, bipolar disorder, breast cancer, bulimia, bypass surgery, C-section, celiac disease, cerebral palsy, cervical cancer, colon cancer, congestive heart failure, Crohn’s disease, depression, diabetes, epilepsy, heartburn, hemophilia, hepatitis, high cholesterol, hysterectomy, kidney disease/renal failure, kidney stones, leukemia, lung cancer, lupus, lyme disease, lymphoma, mental health issues, migraines, multiple sclerosis, muscular dystrophy, narcolepsy, obesity, obsessive-compulsive disorder, organ transplant, pacemaker, paralysis, paraplegia, Parkinson’s disease, pregnancy, rape, schizophrenia, seasonal affective disorder, seizures, sexual assault, “sexual deviation or disorder,” skin cancer, sleep apnea, stroke, ulcers … and that’s not all
Boy, if this thread turns into another political rant I am going to scream.
MLD, You’ll have to join Xenia on the other thread…
Duane, I was making a point about conversation stoppers. 🙂
Tony – are you copying and pasting from another website?
No I made the list
SRA refers Satanic Ritual Abuse, correct?
What do you mean she “promotes” it? Do you mean she tells others about it? Or that she seeks to further it?
You mention contradictions between her book and her presentations, but those would have been more useful to me. What you’ve given here is not exactly prima facie, but rather tries hard to create an impression that might or might not be valid.
As far as who to give the benefit of the doubt to, the born again Christian or others (such as her kids you mentioned) still engaged in the occult, I would give it to the born again Christian.
As far as her kids, how many examples of faithful people in scripture has messed up kids?
Some of the phrasing is hard to understand…
Some news: Hank Hanegraaf was diagnosed today with a rare but treatable form of cancer.
You asked on the worship thread “is it possible that there is a time period ahead when, with Jerusalem as its center, the world will see a remnant of Jews carrying the Gospel message after the Bride (Church) has been called out for the wedding feast?”
No, the way you have stated this is absolutely not possible.
Ran out of time to check back earlier. Some of what you wrote is familiar, but will have to check out the other points. Michelson did lose a lot of credibility for causes she championed that turned out to be bogus. One was the SRA (recovered memories, etc.) phenomena and the other was supporting Laurel Wilson who turned out to be a fraud. One time I viewed a video of Michelson speaking and subsequently viewed one of Kathryn Kuhlman just to test a theory. I found some of their delivery eerily similar. It is subjective on my part, and others may not see what I saw, but I do put it out there.
A message from David Zahl (an episcopal guy at a Lutheran conference.)
The first 5 min will hook you in – but a serious topic.
Psychic surgeries, backmasking, limbs growing back (a claim by the great “healer” RW Schambach) is all utter nonsense. All the people making such claims belong in the Mike Warnke camp of credibility. They are lying.
The claims aren’t what frustrate me: it is the fact that they are all still in business because of the mindless acceptance of their claims by so many Christians.
I appreciate that Tony took the time to dig into this, further revealing what she really is.
#15 – “No, the way you have stated this is absolutely not possible.” well, MLD, perhaps my unacademic off the cuff synopsis is inaccurately stated, but…
from what i understand of the Lutheran construct of Scripture i’d expect your adamance, yet you see, i’m not convinced that you folk have got it all correct… i’m not convinced that any denomination – or whatever you wish to call yourselves – does
so i say, with respect, that is your teaching, but only time will tell if it is correct…
it does serve one purpose, tho… no Lutheran will sell everything he has to go live on a hill and wait for the end… at least not now…
‘course one might say a place on Lake Havasu is the Lutheran version 🙂 (it does sound nice, may God bless you and Mrs. MLD as you spend time there)
Chuck Smith, in one of his tapes, made the claim that he prayed for a little boy whose finger tip had been cut off in an accident and behold! The finger was made whole again. Since Chuck never made a big deal out of this story, never capitalized on it or sensationalized on it and I only heard that story one time and since I do believe such things are possible, I am inclined to believe this story. God restored the little boy’s finger.
Mike Warnke is surely a bag of worms. There was an early Chuck Smith connection to Warnke. I had a relative go to an event in AZ back in the early 70’s (’73?) in which Warnke was featured doing his schtick. It was for college kids and it was sponsored by Chuck Smith/Calvary Chapel. Don’t know what happened to the Warnke-Smith relationship, but it it did drop off. There’s even an old report that said Walter Martin tried to intercede when one of Warnke’s marriages was going south. Even he didn’t realize what a liar and adulterer Mike was. Martin’s efforts failed, of course.
My goodness what discernment we had back then! Instant sanctification, Calvary Chapel style! Those that were specially anointed and instantly healed of all temptation could bypass taking up the cross and all that messy, painful business of becoming more Christlike over a long period of time like the rest of us slobs. With the blessings of The Chuck or similar, they could just step up to the podium or the pulpit and tell us all what to do! How fun! And as a bonus–if you order now–you can have Lonnie Frisbee, Kathryn Kuhlman, and maybe Paul Cain! Yes, kids! All the unbiblical fruit it yielded can be yours for just the small price of turning off your brain! What a bargain! Infact, if you order in the next 10 minutes, we’ll throw in the ever oppressive, but always useful, Moses Model that covers up sin in the name of Orthodoxy! Yay! ….barf bag search…
Strangely enough–I am inclined to believe that story of healing, too. That’s because God is good and faithful even if Chuck was not necessarily.
JM, I am not going to lump Lonnie with all the other charlatans. Truly, he was a troubled man. He was thrust into a role that few could have handled at 20 years old. I had a long conversation with him back in 1979. He was very honest about his mistakes. I believe he was sincere in owning his choices. I have to say also that I responded to his preaching in January of 1970. I have followed Jesus since then, sometimes successfully, sometimes not. It was the beginning for me and God has been faithful to me, irrespective of the person that God used to call me to follow Jesus. Actually, God had prepared me and I was low-hanging fruit!
A few weeks ago, someone on here questioned whether or not Lonnie was “saved”. I had to laugh. Only God has that information. Not one of us has any more right to heaven than Lonnie. It is ALL through the redemptive work of Christ. To speculate on whether or not a person is saved is a waste of time. We can have our opinions but in the end only God knows.
I would still have trouble with Lonnie for a variety of reasons, but I do not mind hearing another voice on the matter. It is good that you have shared what you did. It adds perspective. The instrument God used to get the Gospel to me eventually went into terrible sin as well. Like you, I held on. My faith was not in the instrument–it was in God.
I will give you this about Lonnie. He was, indeed, troubled and needed guidance. He had already suffered abuse in his life. Instead, what he got was the older, father-like figures exploiting him for their own purposes and then throwing him away like rubbish. That is the way I view what Chuck Smith and John Wimber did. What they did was disgusting and should never happen to anyone.
I’ll check back here later.
“so i say, with respect, that is your teaching, but only time will tell if it is correct…”
All I can tell you is that my teaching is not a Lutheran position by itself – it is the teaching of all amillennialists regardless of denomination.
But the teaching comes from the exact words of Jesus in Mathew 25:31-46. I do not alter one word from what Jesus said when he described his return for judgment. Not once does Jesus mention coming back to snatch his church away and leave a bunch of Jews behind to save the rest of the world.
Paul never mentions Jesus returning to snatch his church away and leaving the others behind … nowhere – not once.
Your post on the other thread said that the church gets taken away by Jesus for the wedding feast while the ‘faithful’ Jews stay behind to save the others. Not in scripture.
nah, MLD, that’s not what i said… if i did i wasn’t clear… it isn’t ‘faithful’ Jewish members of the Bride of Christ staying behind…
i believe that what is taught is: after the Church is taken out, there is a remnant of Jews (perhaps, of the orthodox Jews – i don’t know) who then realize that Jesus is who He claimed to be and these Jews then spread the gospel during the remainder of the Tribulation period…
is that correct? i don’t know, but i do know that years ago, when i looked into it, they made a very cogent case for their interpretation… anyone can read up on it, if they need clarification… i’m willing to let it ride for now…
BTW – those who’ve fed off of that interpretation, extrapolating and exploiting it to make themselves a tidy living are not among the ones who’d convince me, but they do indicate that the devil would like to sully the interpretation… which does it give it a little extra credibility, actually 🙂
“All I can tell you is that my teaching is not a Lutheran position by itself – it is the teaching of all amillennialists regardless of denomination.”
yes, i know that and the above mentioned exploiters are driving many back to your shared historic no-thousand-year reign-of-Christ-on-the-earth view … which is fine with me
em, the error of your statement was this – “the world will see a remnant of Jews carrying the Gospel message **** after the Bride (Church) has been called out for the wedding feast?”****
Is the church raptured to the wedding feast? What happens to those Left Behind who then become Christians – like the remnant Jews a Rayford Steele? 😉 — do they miss the wedding feast of the Lamb or are there 2 sittings like in a fancy restaurant.
post script to my #26 – the Matthew reference you used slots in very nicely to a millennial reign… there was no reason when Jesus was teaching there to mention a coming Church or even its role that i can see…
i don’t want to get into the presumption of a theological debate with you, but then i think that i’m way too much a religious misfit to ever fit your profile of the stereotyped ignorant ‘merican evangelical … LOL …
although those folk may not be as far from God as some think – dunno
em, I don’t really get what you are saying in your post script, but I do know that in Acts 2 Peter does declare that Jesus is presently reigning from David’s throne. That right there wipes out any case for an earthly reign.
Now, perhaps not you but I have always accused the rapture folks of having too many 2nd comings, too many judgments and too many resurrections. To add that they have too many David’s thrones (one in heaven and one on earth) is not that far of a leap.
ah me, i wish i had something to do that would get me out of this conversation…
i guess one could say that there are 2 sittings – early and late
extrapolating as i type here… it is possible that the Church, which for a number of reasons is a special set of Believers, is called out before the wrath of God is poured out on mankind here on planet earth (lots of O.T. reasons to see that God’s grace & patience does have a limit)
meanwhile, that beautiful wedding is taking place (somewhere off site)… Bride, Groom and friends
then here comes the King (with His Bride) to set up a Kingdom reign on earth for one thousand years during which time the kings of the peoples all over the earth (one thousand years of peace gives plenty of time to repopulate the planet) will be under His rule, but their egos won’t like it and by the time they’ve chafed for that thousand years, Satan will be turned loose and like all psychopaths, he will visit those kings, round up an army to challenge the dictator Christ Jesus – then God says, enough! I’ve vindicated My Holiness and it’s time to burn – forgive me, God, for i know i’m putting words in Your mouth, but i don’t know how else to do it
The Gospel according to Marvel.
MLD, you who love the allegorical, why is David’s Throne not a portable one? Wherever, Jesus reigns over man, the Throne of David is…
Caesar’s throne was in Rome, but when he traveled, that’s where the throne was 🙂
to carry the lame analogy one step further when and where Rome did rule, not all were in submission…
(when Christ returns to earth, He’ll be much more effective than Caesar)
Em, I love you – however, most readings of that account I have run across begin with “Once upon a time.” 😉
The Church is not a special set of believers, Em This Church *is* the believers. All the believers.
ah, Jean, we are commanded to “marvel not…” you Lutes ganging up one me again?
Just Joshing with you Em. I thought I recalled your story in a magazine I read once, which began with,
Long, long ago, in a Galilee far far away…
Em, I must say I admire that you do hang in there and go toe to toe with us. And to your benefit, Steve Wright and others here tell the same silly account but they then run and hide.
See, this is what bothers me about this whole line of thinking. It makes the focus of the Scriptures the Hebrew people, not Christ and His Bride.
Why were the Hebrew people called, why were they set aside as a special people? It was to preserve the line of the Messiah. The focus is the Messiah Himself, not the line of people that produced Him. The Old Testament is not so much about individual Jews, interesting as they are, as it’s about where it was all leading: to the birth of the Messiah, who was a Messiah for all people, not just His ancestors.
They have completed the task God set before them. They preserved the Old Testament Scriptures and they produced, humanly speaking, the Messiah. Their work in this area is done. The culmination of their history and the history of the whole world is the Incarnation of Christ. What more is there for them to do? The idea that they need to rebuild a temple and start sacrificing animals again completely negates the Incarnation of Christ. The Old Covenant is finished, time for them (and all of us) to embrace the New.
If God is nostalgic and out of affection for Moses and David sends a wave of repentance and salvation to the Jewish people, I would not be surprised. But they would be joining the CHURCH, not existing as some special separate category.
Xenia, i know that you and many hold to this and have historically….
i am not teaching here, just answering some things put forth as fact that i don’t see as MLD asserts all we evangelicals all adhere to
IMV and FWIW, the Church is a special sub-set of Believers begun at Pentecost and tasked with spreading the Gospel and ending at the removal of the Church from the earth … i believe the second birth defines this sub-set in time… however, i also suspect, dunno, that many from the beginning of Time until the very end will be saved who have never heard of Christ, in addition to the saved who came before the birth of the Church… none of this group will be of heretical religions
in other words, the Church is the culmination of a plan of God, not the whole sum of the Redeemed
unless God goads me to continue (please, no more, Lord), i’ll leave you all to enjoy your truths and insights among yourselves – forgive the careless typos and scrambled thots
“…the same silly account…” MLD ! God is listening here… but i forgive you 🙂
If the Church is a subset of believers, what is the master set that the Church is a subset of? Who are the believers except the Church? Are there believers outside the Church? (I am not talking about the Orthodox Church in particular.)
“Are there believers outside the Church?”
Not if “one” means “one” in Ephesians. But, then again, maybe there are two “one”s in someone’s paradigm.
The Gospel according to DC.
I, too, admire Em’s good-natured tenacity.
“what is the master set that the Church is a subset of?” The rapture folks of today try to hide that the Church is Plan B – the subset of Plan A. Somewhere along the line what was proclaimed boldly, now has been taken in secret like some Masonic oath.
God has saved the Jews – look at Paul, look at Peter, look at me, look at Marty Goetz. To all Jews, the kingdom is open – under THE PLAN – not Plan A or a Plan B.
But MLD, how do you construct a physical kingdom chessboard and sell end times books and raise money on THE PLAN?
MLD is a perfect example for why the dispensational view of Israel doesn’t make any sense.
What category, what subset, is he supposed to be a member of?
What category are most of the members of the early church members of? They were all Jews at first, except Luke and a few others.
When does the believing Jew bypass MLD’s situation and become a member of a different subset? After the Rapture?
Will these “Rapture Jews” be part of the church or are they the Main Event, the reprisal of Plan A, the point of the entire story? Will they baptize and receive Communion or will they be sacrificing sheep and goats?
“Not if “one” means “one” in Ephesians….”
ah, but Ephesians was written to the Church… we are one, no Jew, no Greek, no Gentile subsets.. well, perhaps, one can teach subsets to the Church, but instinct says ‘no’
the “master set?” that would be the whole family of God and just who comprises that or how many subsets of the family there are, i’m not able to say – i’m not even sure that God would agree that His categories are subsets, for that matter
So Jews who get saved at one point in time are members of one subset and Jews who get saved at another point in time are members of another subset.
Yet there is no difference between Jew and Gentile, the Scriptures say.
i’m inclined to plod, head down, looking for potholes, like a pilgrim, not sure that’s either tenacity or good humor – one thing i will declare i love God’s truth and i love those who pursue it
God keep all close
with respect and with this i quit
Xenia, your # 49 isn’t logical
i love God’s truth and i love those who pursue it<<<<
That much is certain.
Some Jews, like Peter, Paul and MLD, were saved at one point in time. They are members of the Church.
Some Jews, people as yet unknown, who will accept their Messiah after the Rapture, are another subset.
So if you are a Jew who believes in the Messiah, it depends on when you were born if you are a member of the Church or not.
Is that right?
Thanks Em. I think I’m starting to get this: The Gospels written to the the Church, while the epistles are not written to the Jews. That clarifies things. Why did God have to make things so complicated for us simple Midwestern folks?
In my 54, I mean to say “The Gospels are not written to the the Church, while the epistles are not written to the Jews. That clarifies things. Why did God have to make things so complicated for us simple Midwestern folks?”
Jean, that’s not what i said… but 🙂
Xenia, from where i sit, anyone who is born again between Pentecost and the Rapture (or Christ’s return, if that your preference) is part of the Church are they not? now that you mention it, one could debate as to whether the Bride of Christ and the Church are one and the same…
i believe they are, but theologically speaking – dunno – … doesn’t it seem strange that we have a subset who consider themselves the keepers of God-logic? well, maybe they are – dunno, again
if you are a human being of any stripe, it depends on when you spent your time on earth as to whether you are a candidate for “Church-hood” … many Believers born outside of that time period have their places in the Eternal Kingdom of God and i haven’t a clue as to how He will categorize them
i realize what you folks are doing here, i hope we have tossed around a few differences that are ponderable, even though some of the conclusions may have come out as a bit odd, eh?
at least, they do from where i’m sitting
#55 Jean, that’s not what i said… but 🙂 i’ve lived in the Midwest and the folks there can handle complicated things much better than us Coastals
my computer needs a housecleaning – it jumped out of this thread while i was still writing earlier and i didn’t notice that it had posted my comment – sorry bout the double post – the comments were certainly not worth double posting
again God keep all close and comforted… and worshiping and praising what His grace has revealed to us of Him, eh?
Thank you, France!
Tonight we are all Frenchmen…
Liberty, equality, fraternity — these values connect the West, no matter what country we live in.
Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *
Notify me of follow-up comments by email.
Notify me of new posts by email.
This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.