The Prophets who do not Prophesy; The Leaders who cannot Lead

Frequently we are being asked to believe that the new apostles and prophets on the scene today are the budding government rule of the Church, on God's behalf.

We are told that they are walking in such high levels of anointing and authority that they are the leading edge of spiritual revelation and that all Christians should heed the word of the prophets to take us into the glorious Church of the 21st century.

They have, they inform us, moved beyond the veil into a place of open seeing where they have visions, dreams and words from God that are far beyond the reach of ordinary Christians.

However, on the eve of world war, all we have heard from these "prophets" is confusion, disagreement, and a mixture of differing opinions. Either that, or silence!

Confusion

This fact has prompted some, including Rick Joyner, to try and mend the fences by reconciling all the current opinions and telling us not to try to discern what is right or what is wrong (!) but simply go with the flow until it all comes together in the end (presumably after the event.)

What Rick Joyner offers us is no more or less than the thoughts of any concerned American on the eve of war. If he were a mere journalist we might read his piece without dismay.

However, he considers himself to be one of the leading lights of the New Order for the Global Church! Thousands mistakenly hang upon his words as God's direct leading in this time of peril. But if they really were the chosen instruments of God's word, would God not be using these men and women actually to direct his people instead of confuse them?

Might God not speak with a single voice so that all those who are in His Spirit would hear the same thing - but here, not a bit of it. Apparently all the different revelations are no problem, since God gives "different parts of the puzzle" to this one and that.

(That was apparent in the "prophets'" pronouncements on the film 'Lord of the Rings', which some condemned as error and some said contained spiritual allegories from God that we needed to heed!)

Reading the Old Testament, one does not get the impression that Jeremiah (for example) could prophesy a lenient attitude towards Babylon while at the same time Habakkuk (for example) would recommend its destruction! Does God speak with a divided tongue?

Read the summarised extract below and make up your own mind if God is indeed honouring these prophets with wisdom beyond that of ordinary men.

(Initial note by Steve Shultz:) [My emphasis throughout]

Please read this first . . . Some have been saying that the prophets have been silent lately regarding the Iraq crisis or possible war. That is partly true and partly not. There have been some words coming forth but I have felt led of the Lord to hold back until I could present a "unified" portrayal of what the prophets are saying or "seeing." That time has now come. Rick Joyner has done the best presentation that I have seen, which addresses this situation of the differing revelations the prophets are getting regarding Iraq. "Differing revelations?" you may ask. Rick speaks of the prophets each, as groups or as individuals, getting their own "pieces of the puzzle." ...These men and women then each get pieces of God's elaborate puzzle, and they divulge their part of what they have received. It should always be understood that NO PROPHET has all the interpretations for each event.

Thus, Rick Joyner, along with many others of God's wise men and wise women have been about seeking God together regarding Iraq. Below is an EXCELLENT summary of the viewpoints and possible ways God is, has, or MAY be working in this situation regarding a possible war with Iraq. ... do not try to discern who is right and who is wrong. Again-- break the old mold and paradigm --the paradigm of incorrect thinking. . . Instead fit the pieces together.

[MY NOTE: God here doesn't seem to know what He's doing, according to his prophets. He seems to be dithering back and forth considering several courses of action. Is God really so undirected? Secondly, is discerning right from wrong an "old paradigm" and an incorrect way of thinking? We are asked to believe so!]

Rick Joyner: World War III, War In Iraq,
"There is Merit to Both Sides of this Issue"
http://www.morningstarministries.org/

February 11, 2003

Bob Jones, a prophetic friend who has had remarkable accuracy in prophesying major international and national events, [but please see here!!] has maintained for many years that World War III began with the assassination of Anwar Sadat. ... Then in the mid-1980s Paul Cain received a word that ... what would emerge from the meltdown of communism would be a merger of the remnants of communism with radical Islamic extremists, and it would be far more dangerous than communism ever was. That prophecy was true. Now we are facing just such a threat—it is more dangerous!

We Know In Part . . . We Prophesy In Part . . .

Bob Jones has also maintained adamantly that the Persian Gulf War was not over when it looked like it was over to the whole world. Again it appears that he has been right. Even so, both Bob Jones and Paul Cain are also resolute in believing that it would be a grave mistake for the United States to attack Iraq at this time. Why?

I have other prophetic friends that feel this is a righteous war and that the United States has a responsibility to act even if it has to do it alone. I am not trying to be political, but I believe both sides may actually be hearing from the Lord. How could that be?

In I Corinthians 13:9 it says, "For we know in part, and we prophesy in part..."

So if we are going to have the whole picture we must learn to put the different parts together that different people are getting. Until they are put together they do often appear to conflict.

[MY NOTE: This interpretation of the verse is novel! Surely what the Apostle Paul intended to convey is not that we have to fit together different "parts" of the puzzle by comparing seemingly contradictory prophecies, but that our earthly knowledge and gifts are limited by our humanity until the "perfect comes" and we see God face to face. There's no excuse for true prophets to be at loggerheads over what they say.]

Is There A Bigger Picture?

I confess that I have a different view on this matter than maybe anyone else I know. I also do not claim to have heard anything personally from the Lord on this matter. I have prayed and asked Him to give me something clear about it, but He has not. ... there is substantial merit on both sides of the argument. Very few wars in history have ever been a cut and dried good versus evil.

Arguments for War with Iraq

• Point One: There is no doubt that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction.
• Point Two: History teaches repeatedly that the longer we wait to deal with rogue and ambitious dictators the more costly it will be.
• Point Three: [Iraq] value [their weapons of mass destruction] very highly, which they would not do if they did not have an intended use for them
• Point Four: Iraq is harboring terrorists, terrorist training bases, and is in league with Al Queda and other terrorist organizations
• Point Five: Sanctions and diplomatic efforts have not accomplished anything with Iraq.

Arguments Against War with Iraq

• Point One: War will destroy many lives and should always be our very last resort.
• Point Two: Saddam is not the madman that Western propaganda has made him out to be. No dictator is a nice guy, but he has not done anything worse than other dictators that we are not threatening.
• Point Three: Contrary to Western propaganda, most Iraqis are loyal to Saddam and it is their will for him to stay in power.
• Point Four: Though it is acknowledged that Iraq has weapons of mass destruction (almost no one disputes this), there is no specific evidence or intelligence that he has plans to use them against anyone.
• Point Five: Never has the United States ever attacked another country first without provocation or being attacked. There is no legal or moral justification for doing this ...
• Point Six: There is no proof or convincing evidence that Iraq is in league with terrorists, terrorist organizations, and is in fact been one of the strongest bulwarks against Islamic extremism...
• Point Seven: Just because sanctions and diplomatic efforts have not worked yet, maybe stronger ones would...
• Point Eight: North Korea is a far more dangerous problem. Al Queda is a more dangerous problem.

My [Rick Joyner's] Position

MY NOTE: Please remember that Joyner works closely with Paul Cain who has previously commended Saddam Hussein and been received well by him - this report from Joe Chambers and others: "What is amazing is that Rick Joyner tells all about this [his initiation into the Knights of Malta] on a tape and includes in the story how that a key member of this order arranged a meeting between Paul Cain and Saddam Hussein, the President of Iraq. He states that the leaders in Iraq as well as Saddam had heard Paul Cain and were convinced that he was a true prophet. If Saddam Hussein and his henchmen are convinced that Paul Cain and Rick Joyner are true prophets then you know who they serve..." (From The End Times... Joseph Chambers September 1998, page 3 report on this website)

• Point One: There is merit to both sides of this issue. ... The real point of dispute is not whether Iraq should be made to give up their weapons of mass destruction, but whether a United States led invasion of Iraq is merited in this situation or at this time. I personally do not believe it is merited yet, but we are getting very close to the time when it is.
• Point Two: It is possible that stronger sanctions and diplomatic efforts could work, but they would not have a chance without the very real threat of war that is now looming.
• Point Three: The weapons of mass destruction need to be removed from Iraq, but the removal of Saddam should not necessarily be linked with this.... to leave Saddam in place has two significant advantages that should be considered.
  • 1.) The first is the enemy you know is usually better than the one you do not know.
  • 2.) The second is with Saddam in power there remains an excuse for patrolling Iraq to be sure that it does not cause any further problems in the region.
• Point Four: The removal of Saddam from power in Iraq will almost certainly have a negative impact on Christians and those of other religions in Iraq, where they now enjoy the most religious freedom in the Middle East.
• Point Five: North Korea is a far more dangerous threat to the United States and to the world.
• Point Six: The conflict between India and Pakistan is another one of the most dangerous situations in the world.
• Point Seven: The best solution to the problem would be if Saddam would give up the "hide and seek," with his weapons of mass destruction and simply give them up—all of them.

The United States has not been totally just in its dealings with Iraq either. There are things that we need to make right that could again make Iraq the most pro-Western, pro-United States Islamic nation that it once was. [MY NOTE: So now evil only exists if the West refuses to apologise for its own attitudes??]

We should remember how the Lord used Nebuchadnezzar, to which Saddam has liked to compare himself. Would that not be the greatest victory of all? Would that not also be the most stunning victory for United States foreign policy?

This remains my prayer, that the Lord would use Saddam as an example of His power of redemption and reconciliation. That may seem naive, but I am convinced this is the Lord's will in this matter.

[MY NOTE: Naive? You surely are. Have you never heard of the judgement of God? Do you not think that the patience of God over Iraq has waited long enough and that the cry of innocent blood has not reached to heaven?]

What I [Rick] Have Been Shown

I still believe there may be many parts to this picture that we do not have....There are so many areas that are not black and white in this that I am resolved to acknowledge to not know what I do not know, and pray for our leaders to be given the wisdom to do what needs to be done. ...What I have been shown was shocking to me, and that is the United States is going to become an increasingly oppressive nation. We are going to become more unrelenting in imposing our will internationally, and there is going to be an increasing loss of our liberty at home. ,... there is a rising lawlessness in the United States that will be our destruction if not checked.

--- Rick Joyner -------

[MY NOTE: I do agree that America is not blameless - what nation is? I do agree also that America like all the nations of the world will become more oppressive; that is bound to happen in the light of the ongoing progress towards the End. But to unfavourably compare a democratic nation like America to a repressive and totalitarian regime that poisons, tortures and kills its own is taking things a little too far I believe And I speak as a non-American.

I wonder perhaps whether Rick and Paul should travel to Iraq today and stand in the streets openly declaring their opinions for and against Saddam, and also proclaiming their Christian faith, and then we could see the religious tolerance of Iraq in action].