It's a Quantum Leap Brothers and Sisters

 

More Bloody Revolutions?

I want to share something on a bigger scale using a bit of history, One of the big things about Union thinking and single eye thinking that Jesus talked about is related to the words of David...even though I make my 4 poster in Sheol there are you
and the prophets somewhere...(listen if St Paul didn't have Google then I can say that too)
You are surrounded by Darkness....or in the Midst of Darkness
Darkness is as LIGHT
we are over SHADOWED by the Most High
in the SHADOW of His wings

Matthew 5 makes it absolutely clear that the BLESSING of the Lord is to be found right in very precise spot where we hate according to the natural man....errrr...but only when He shows up.  We require Him to show up to survive.

A lot of the mad way Christians live....and this is also true of all humans too...is God showing up unexpectedly and undergirding us in completely alien situations.
We are like burning bushes that never burn up.
We are like roots out of parched ground
"Where did you lot come from?"  Ask any of us on the net here regularly making absurd spiritual type statements. They would be absurd but they are coming out of God really showing up in incredible ways.

But God showed up for Ishmael and his mum too!!!!   That's a great bit of prefiguring there by the way...read it for yourselves.
(In the wake of the Charlie Hebdo attack....it may well transpire the attackers were "turned" and mindcontrolled" and the whole thing wasn't really Muslim at base, but like so many others, secret service based with Muslim as cover. If that is so my heart goes out to Muslims who now find themselves in the midst of French racial hatred.)

The context of this post of seeing the WHOLE is to do with prayer.
For centuries Christians have been praying THY KINGDOM COME and while Christians have been "meaning that" outwardly, because they may have not been very mature....
God HAS BEEN FAITHFULLY answering...but in the same manner as He answered the prayer for the Messiah

Like a ROOT out of parched ground.

If you can see in the Spirit you can see that particularly in the last 500 years we have started a completely new traversal of the heavenly Tabernacle. Any unbelievers unfamiliar with this stuff check it out for yourselves.....
The Tabernacle, (and Moses one was just a Cornflakes packet model of the real Heavenly One)see Hebrews)...had three sections.
Luther began things again when he stated simply
Salvation is by faith in the death and resurrection of Christ. Not by paying your way in Indulgences to the Pope.
Spiritually this is the BRAZEN altar ...if you stray any further out of the door you are nolonger in God's Tabernacle...you cease to be a part of the Heavenly Covenant with man....this is what Luther was saying.

Now follow all the "furniture" of the Tabernacle inwards and I guarantee you can understand that each MOVE of GOD from the Anabaptists (Laver and baptisms) onwards corresponds with all the rest of the furniture until we "come home" to the Holy of Holies, God incarnating Himself in man.

BUT SAINTS AND SOON SAINTS.....what did it "look like"?
100 Years War
Revolutions
Birth of America
Freemasonry
Millions dead
World Wars
Police States
Cold War
Threat of Nuclear War......wars and rumours of wars

Saints praying "Thy Kingdom Come"  won't be thinking God has ever answered.
But in the reverse sort of Kingdom weave whereby the underneath part of the tapestry is what we see, on top the true Spirit weave is actually what is birthed in corporate man in terms of light,  understanding,and manner of living.....
Revelation as in the Book of the Revelation of Jesus Christ to John makes it perfectly clear that Christ is reigning and ruling and opening seals that ARE BUILDING A HOUSE in the EARTH...it just doesn't always look like it...

Any more than the birth of the child looks any more like the child that 2 hours later, cleaned up and in blankets is presented to any visitors to see the mum and child.

YOU AND I, like DAD's allowed into childbirth....are just privileged to see the messy birth process of the KINGDOM actually arriving LIVE as it happens.
Amidst screams.
Traumas
Negatives
Disturbances
and so on

But history shows us some amazing things.
This is the well known one I was going to pinpoint.
European Revolutions and Britain

In the Spirit it was the TIME in the heavenlies for the precursor to the birth of the new PRIESTHOOD in all the nations of the world.
In Moses time this looked like the Levites all washing ceremonially and being anointed to enter the covered areas of the Tabernacle. Why covered? Because beyond this point ONLY priests could enter, and only the Spirit was going to be the Light source  . Around the 1750s onwards we are at the very earliest preparations for the Baptism in the Spirit to be outpoured again as experience across the earth in the early 20th Century Pentecostal explosion. But in the late 1700s this was still not yet.

But it WAS the birth of the Brethren understanding that we were ALL ministers and priests. So in the Spirit this was the rolling out of the new understanding of who are now the LEVITES?
Without that understanding God is not going to be able to baptise everyone in the Spirit come the twentieth century.

So how did it "look " in the natural?
Well in Europe and America it "looked" like a Freemasonry bloodbath as the peoples severed themselves from the "old priesthood " notion of the catholic heirarchies (especially France) but also from the old order patrimonies of KINGS ruling nations.    THIS WAS GOD's TIME and you either did it in a bloody way or as in England...you did it more in God.

After praying literally for a 100 years non stop, the Moravians went into all the world preaching the gospel....but the100 year  DAM of SPIRITUAL POWER affected nobody more than the UK and America. John Wesley was "Kingdom blasted" by contact with these Moravians and nothing more so than by the incident of the ship in a storm. He knew that they knew that they knew that they knew...
and in that moment he knew that he didn't........

METHODISM was only a RHEMA stage in God. RHEMA is a direct spoken Word of God similar to the manna they received in the Wilderness which went "off " in about 3 days. Methodism may be slightly renewed by now but in the 1960s they had so "gone  off" it is a wonder I could ever become a Christian at all, and as it was I never became a Christian in the Methodist church.

But in 1750s-90s Methodism and Wesley and Whitfield's preaching WAS God's rhema word to be able to affect Britain  so that we never had the bloody revolution that was planned by the occult elite.
Methodism was never meant to be a sum total denomination in its own right. Neither was the Brethren Movement later.

TODAY...the WORD is GOD IN YOU AS YOU.

You can either do it in a Luciferian way in New Age, and experience the full force of his hideousness or you can experience revival in God  and experience the change in history in a less bloody way....BUT EXPERIENCE the birth of the KINGDOM in real time you will.  For the LORD of Heaven and Earth has decreed it and is birthing it, and NO MAN can stop the prayer of 2000 years.....

THY KINGDOM COME.

New Covenant Good Breath Syndrome - John Crowder

New Covenant Pneumatology

by John Crowder on Friday, 7 September 2012 at 10:21 ·

Here's a common question we often receive: In reference to the finished work of the cross, is there a "second work" of the Baptism of the Spirit?

This is an important topic, because many people feel insecure, condemned or lacking as if they don't have the Spirit or don't have "enough" of the Spirit.

Wesleyan and early Pentecostals broke the Godhead into different parts that came at different times (second blessing, etc.), but the church never did that historically. Our idea of baptism of the Spirit is where the Holy Spirit comes to live in us. A lot of our idea of "second blessing" has to do with our word "baptism" which was Greek for "immersion" or "dunking." Because there was controversy going on during the writing of the King James Bible with the Anabaptists, the translators decided not to use the word "dunk" (because the Anabaptists believed in dunking not sprinkling). Rather than translate "dunk" ... instead they inserted a Greek word "baptizmo" into the English language ... Voila! A new word. So instead of John the Dunker, we get John the Baptist.

So ... the "baptism" of the Spirit is not a separate thing where first you only had Jesus, and now you get the Spirit. It just means to get dunked, immersed or have your senses tangibly "filled" or flooded with the Spirit Whom you had all along. After all, He is the "Spirit of Jesus." Col. 2:10 says "By your union with Christ you are filled with the Godhead" ... that means you already have the Spirit ... you even have the Father in you too! So "infilling" is not a "second work," rather it's about a continual enjoyment - a daily dunking - and experience of the Spirit we already have. Not a one-time or two-time event, but Paul says, "Be ye continually filled ..." Eph. 5:18. It's an abiding relationship - He remains in you.

He's not "out there" and baptism was Him "coming in." Baptism is about drinking from the well that is already in you. Flooding you from that inner well - from the inside out.

Since the Trinity is inseparable, we get the full package in one. If you really even want to get technical, since Christ died for all humanity, even unbelievers have Him in a hidden way. As Paul told the pagans on Mars Hill, "In Him we live and move and have our being, even as your own poets say 'We are His offspring.'" Or consider when Jesus was speaking before the cross (and before Pentecost), in Luke 17, when he told his hearers that they already had the whole Kingdom inside of them! It was already there, in a hidden way - even though none of them were able to continually access it by faith like a New Covenant believer.

So the difference has to do with manifestation and experience of God, which of course we know only comes through faith or believing.

There is also the principle of impartation. Don't get mixed up - thinking you first "got" the Spirit in the laying on of hands - but He did smack you! When someone prays for impartation, they are not giving you something you "don't already have." We all have the fullness, but we are also an interdependent body. We leak onto one another! So when we pray for one another, we can stir up things and awaken giftings, etc. to manifest. The guys Paul chatted to in Acts had believed in Jesus but said "We didn't know there was a Holy Spirit?" When He laid hands on them, they received impartation from Paul, but that impartation was merely stirring up by faith something that was already latent within them.

Also, another confusing verse for some people is Rom. 8:9 "You are controlled not by the sinful nature but by the Spirit, if the Spirit of God lives in you. And if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, he does not belong to Christ." This is not to be lifted out of context and turned into a proof that some people don't belong to God. In the context here, Paul is addressing believers - not making a statement about unbelievers. He's warning disobedient believers who are refusing to submit to the Holy Spirit in their lives. He's essentially saying "You say that the Spirit of God lives in you, and you are right. However, your life should be reflecting the Spirit of Christ." As he says in verse 12, "We have an obligation - but it is not to the sinful nature."

So let's not think in terms of "when" the Spirit came. This wine was poured out from the foundation of the world. It's not "when" you first believed, but "what" you believe. As we realize He finished the job and plugged us into union with Him, we experience Him continually!

Chris's note: Pneuma is Greek for Breath or Spirit

Members One of Another: Part 1 by Daniel Yordy

Members One of Another: Part 1

By Daniel Yordy – August 15, 2010
PDF Version for printing and distribution

"We, being many, are one body in Christ, and individually members of one another." Romans 12:5

"For as the body is one and has many members, but all the members of that one body, being many, are one body, so also is Christ. For by one Spirit we were all baptized into one body . . . and have all been made to drink into one Spirit. For in fact the body is not one member but many." 1 Corinthians 12:12-14

"That they all may be one, (just) as You, Father, are in Me, and I in You; that they also may be one in Us, that the world may believe that You sent Me. And the glory which You gave Me I have given them, that they may be one just as We are one: I in them, and You in Me; that they may be made perfect in one, and that the world may know that You have sent Me, and have loved them as You have loved Me." John 17: 21-23

"Therefore receive one another, just as Christ also received us." Romans 15:7

"Love one another with a pure heart fervently." 1 Peter 1:22

Here is the greatest power in the universe unleashed upon this earth. Here is the focal point of all the intention and purpose of God coming down onto one tiny point. Here is the transition between the two ages. Here is the foundation and the birthing of all that is the age to come.

Everyone assumes they "know" what this love is; few have ever tasted it. We know that none have practiced it because the ages have not changed.

So long as this level of love and relationship is not our continual way of living, we remain in darkness and deception.

Inside of Christian community we came close. Close, but not close enough. Looking back now, I know that we had erected a mighty and impassible barrier between us and this level of love. It was there, and we could glimpse it, but we never tasted it because of the barrier of separation we ourselves had built.

That barrier, that concrete and steel wall, was the order and the hierarchy of relationship in which we moved - apostle, elder, body member. Because that order was fierce and to this day remains inviolable in that same group, we related to one another on the basis of place and position in the pecking order - Always. Yes, there was love in our midst, but pecking order always trumped love - Always. Even when the apostle humbly submitted to the elders, yes it was love, but the whole engagement was still by the pecking order. And the body members, the non-elders always must "know their place."

[But I must say this, those who live in a free-for-all form of Christian relationship are further from knowing true Christian love than we were, even in our in-part expression of church order. Sorry, such a church-order is even worse.]

The last community in which we lived, Blair Valley, was too small to profit from such an arrangement, and by someone's wise counsel, they had removed the elder-body member distinction, and all adults sat together in the elder's meetings. There were only six adults, four of us elders, two non-elders, and three small children. Yet we were a fully recognized wilderness community. To exclude the two wives who were not elders made no sense.

What a world of difference that made. An entire spirit of difficulty that always plagues the communities in the move vanished as if it never existed. Every adult was treated with full respect in government. There was no shadow of "us versus them" as sits upon ALL other move communities to great harm.

[This "us versus them" does far greater harm to those who are elders than to those who are body members. I did not know that all the years I was a "body member," until I sat among the elders myself. There I saw the great damage that had been wrought by this practice in the hearts of those elders whom I had always looked up to. I saw that great harm, but I did not understand it, nor could I credit myself as a sufficient witness or judge.

It was several years later that I sat across from the two leading members from that same group of elders, the apostolic ministry and his wife, here in a living room in Houston, and they said to me that they had begun to see the very same thing I had seen, they had repented of it and confessed their sin to all the communities, but were now no longer welcome - their repentance had challenged the entire pecking order so carefully maintained in the move to this day (he was the third apostle in the move). Then I knew that I had understood this critical truth correctly.]

But still, at Blair Valley, although there was a closeness and a caring for one another that was wonderful, still, there was something that stood between us. I now know what it was. It was "the move" and the "covering" of the apostles. I believe in apostolic covering, I am just convinced that in the move we did not know what a pure apostolic covering was - ever. We could not know it because of the wrong definitions of separation and "place."

It was when my wife and I left that community and the move (and our leaving caused the end of the Blair Valley community), that I tasted of the love and heart relationship that had always eluded our reach. I want to carefully describe what happened. Not to condemn anyone, but to reach for this most precious of truths - Members One of Another.

We were three couples at Blair Valley, husband and wife. One of the couples was an older couple; then the other couple who were closer to our age, but who worked in town to earn some necessary money and came out to the farm only on weekends; and Maureen and I. Because I had not sought the witness of the apostles when we left, we were breaking a spiritual definition. Maureen and the children were already gone when I drove our van with our belongings out the long dirt road to the highway. The older couple accompanied me in their vehicle. Along the way we stopped to do something to my van, the older brother helping me. In our exchange, he spoke something very harshly against me. I replied, "Brother, I'm still a Christian." I do not remember his exact words, but they were to the effect that all spiritual relationship between us was severed, regardless of any fellowship we had enjoyed before. I had received many hard and painful blows all the years I was in the move; that was one of them.

But I want to speak about the other couple, particularly the other brother, who was already in town. He and I had enjoyed a growing relationship of trust and walking together over the years. He had been an elder all the years I had known him, but different from most. He was one of those few (three among hundreds, to be exact) who had always treated me as an equal in every way. He gave me some of the final keys of what it meant to highly regard and respect one another even before we left Blair Valley.

But once we were living in town, this brother and his wife, though they remained in the move, continued to relate to Maureen and myself at the same level of spiritual love and fellowship as before. All the definitions and masks of the move were gone. All that was left was the presence of deep friendship, the anointing of Christ, and the utmost regard and respect for one another.

We left the area a year later, moving hundreds of miles away. I am not good at maintaining relationships over distance, but the closeness of heart between this brother and myself remains to this day at the same level to which it had come.

And understand this, community is a glass house. Once you have lived with people in community for some years, you know them and they know you. There is no hiding of anything. Most church gatherings are filled with smiles and exuberant "love." That's better than nothing, but it is still an outer facade only. But those whom I know from community, I know. And they know me.

We all wear masks. We all present to other Christians the face we want them to see. You do it as much or more than I; don't kid yourself falsely. How do I know that you hide behind masks as much as anyone? Because we're still in this present age. If you had stepped out of this darkness already, the fabric of the universe would already be changed.

And much of our wearing of masks comes out of our creations of the definitions of place and order that come to us from the tree of knowledge, definitions of place and order that we so carefully maintain.

The Quakers defied that whole concept of place and order. They threw it out as nothing more than a masquerade instituting "pride" as the order of society. And that's all it is, and all it will ever be, a masquerade of pride, the wearing of faces.

I want to go on a rabbit trail, here, but I have a specific purpose for this rabbit trail. I want to enlarge our understanding of what this means - Members One of Another. I want to make our understanding as specific as I can.

There is a belief here in the United States that we gained our freedom by fighting and winning the revolutionary war against England. Those who believe this are lied to and lying.

The belief that freedom comes from killing people is a LIE!

But it is a lie that wraps itself all through the warp and woof of this country and every part of the consciousness of most Americans. It is a lie.

If you want to know for certain that the American Revolution had absolutely nothing to do with freedom, just read the first three chapters of Oliver Wiswell by Kenneth Roberts. The American Revolution opposed freedom in every possible way. In reality, it was nothing more than an excuse to kill one's neighbor and to burn down his home.

Yes, the American Revolution brought independence from England, but it did not bring freedom. Freedom came from an entirely different source. The American Revolution was a mighty blow against freedom, but freedom at that time was too strong in America to be so easily destroyed. It would take a far more subtle approach.

The Civil War and its aftermath was an even greater blow against freedom in America than the Revolution had been. The hatred that Lincoln engendered in the hearts of Americans one against the other is incomprehensible. But freedom did not die completely in this country until 1913. From that day until now, America has not known freedom.

The United States of America is NOT a nation of freedom and has not been in any form since 1913. Many other peoples on earth know freedom more than most Americans. The US is an oligarchic dictatorship that pretends to let us vote, and we pretend to chose the face of that dictatorship every four years. It is all a mighty masquerade of pretending. It is all a lie.

Americans say, "Thank God we're free," all the while imagining their chains to be nothing more than emblems of "freedom." Never before in history have a people so clung to the masquerade as tightly and as falsely as Americans do today. And the very statement, "Thank God we're free," is part of the forge upon which those chains are forged. It is all a mental game.

So what is freedom and where did it come from, for it is true that it was tasted here in America for a season and for a time. We do not now know what freedom is, but we maintain its emblems. People mistake the emblems of freedom for the thing itself.

What is freedom?

In the American colonies through the years 1775 and on, the people were split into three nearly equal parts. One third of the colonists chose to take up arms to fight violently against King George. One third of the colonists chose to take up arms to fight violently for King George. And one third of the colonists refused to join either side or to participate in any way in the violence.

If separation from England had been put to a popular vote, the colonies would never have separated. I doubt if the separatists would ever have gotten more than 45% of the vote. Now here is something you were never taught. If the colonists had been allowed to vote for greater FREEDOM completely divorced from the thought of separation from England, the vote for greater freedom would have been more than 95%. Most of those who fought FOR King George and against the rebels were also fighting FOR freedom. They were absolutely convinced that the liars among the rebels were a greater threat to freedom than King George could ever be. They were not wrong.

And here is something else to consider. I have good reason for my belief that if the colonists had been allowed to vote, and if they had voted to stay under King George, freedom would have lasted on this continent much longer than it did.

But neither those who picked up guns to kill their neighbors, either those who fought for "freedom" by fighting for King George, or those who fought for "freedom" by fighting against King George had anything to do with freedom in this country. In fact, all those who chose violence against their neighbor, all of them, were fighting against freedom, no matter how they justified their actions.

Freedom as it was experienced in this country for such a short time in the history of mankind came entirely from the middle group who refused to participate in any way in the murder of their fellow man.

That middle group was an incredibly unique combination never seen in history before or since. Because that large population of peculiar people does not exist anywhere in the world in any size large enough to affect the course of society, the reality of freedom cannot be known again upon this earth. Mankind had one window of opportunity. Only one. God purposed to give us this one taste of freedom so that some of us would understand what freedom is and thus bring freedom to the entire world.

Who was that middle group that refused to kill their neighbors?

Inside that middle group was the largest minority of Quakers and Anabaptists that any place on earth has known before or since.

May I suggest to you that the only taste of freedom that this world has ever known came to us from the Quakers and the Anabaptists, and let me throw this in as well, the Iroquois. This middle group with a huge number of Quakers and Anabaptists lived in the Middle Colonies in proximity to the Iroquois. The hotheads who led the violence were New England "Puritans" on the one side; the leaders of the southern colonies were mostly slavers on the other side.

What is freedom?

Freedom is holding one's neighbor in the utmost respect and regard without thought of any human differences.

Government within many of the Indian tribes in America was based fully on the principle of utmost respect. If you want to see such a thing in action watch Dances with Wolves with Kevin Costner, a worthy education. I suspect that the kind of government you see there was the closest to what God had in mind for the children of Israel.

It was only the Quakers who treated both Indians and African-Americans with utmost respect as people equal in every way to themselves. That respect is freedom.

There is a movie and book of a Quaker woman, named Mary Draper Ingles, who is captured by the Shawnees and eventually escapes. The movie, The Captive, is not on Netflix, so if you want to see it, you have to buy it from Amazon. The reviews that I read all miss the main point of the story. Mary, as a Quaker believer in the Lord Jesus Christ, treats her captors, no matter how savage they appear, with the utmost respect as fellow human beings. Her fellow captives cannot do that. She escapes but must leave her children with the Indians. At the end of the movie, she is back home with her husband when those same Indians appear again on the edge of the clearing. Only this time, they are returning her children to her.

Why? Because of the respect that she showed to them as fellow human beings in spite of her own fear and suffering.

That respect, that high regard for all others as full and equal human beings created in the image of God, IS freedom.

Let me continue. I am getting at something very precise here; I am getting at the very bottom line of "Members One of Another" and how it must overthrow the darkness that grips this world. I don't know that I have ever written anything more important.

It was this respect and high regard for others found among the large Quaker and Anabaptist minority in the colonies out of which freedom flowed to all others. And the only ones I know of today who stand as the last final barrier to unending and open slavery in this country are the Amish. If you and I understood the place that they hold in this regard, we would think entirely differently about the world.

Let me place this definition of freedom on a firm foundation.

The Ten Commandments carved on tablets of stone by the finger of God is the LAW of LOVE and the Foundation of Freedom in disguise. Now, a people who live separately from God, claiming, "All that the Lord says we will do," can only turn those "commandments" into death. And all "Christian" use of the ten commandments in an outward manner is also nothing more than death.

The Ten Commandments are all expressions of property rights. Property rights are the foundation of freedom, but not in the sense of my "fighting others" for my rights. Rather, in the complete opposite sense, my laying down my own life and interests so that I may regard the property rights of others with fullest respect.

What are property rights? "Property" is what I possess as an individual created by God in His image, an individual whom God loves, an individual for whom - alone if there were no others - Christ died to have for Himself as His companion and friend. "Property" is my integrity. "Property" is the value of the blood of Jesus paid to purchase me.

My most important property is my conscience, that is, the integrity of my own personal choice to follow that particular inner light that I choose to follow. This is a right God never violates. The first phrase of the first amendment is not freedom of "religion," it is freedom of conscience. Conscience is the most essential right and property that any human being possesses. That is because when I stand before God in judgment, all other people and all other possessions will not be there with me except one, my conscience, the determination of that "light" I chose to follow. That is why freedom of conscience is placed as the very first of all freedoms.

And that is why Paul's statement, "Those who are led by the Spirit of God are the sons of God," is the most revolutionary political statement ever uttered upon this earth. That statement stands in total defiance of every argument of "authority" in both church and state upon this earth, that the authority that guides every individual man, woman, and child is that Spirit which is inside of them.

"Behold, the days are coming, says the LORD, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah - not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt, My covenant which they broke, though I was a husband to them, says the LORD. But this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, says the LORD: I will put My law in their minds, and write it on their hearts; and I will be their God, and they shall be My people. No more shall every man teach his neighbor, and every man his brother, saying, 'Know the LORD,' for they all shall know Me, from the least of them to the greatest of them, says the LORD. For I will forgive their iniquity, and their sin I will remember no more." Jeremiah 31:31-34

This Covenant promised by God is utter political anarchy from the human point of view. This is the New Covenant; it is the Kingdom of God. And it is how the Quakers alone of all Christian sects understood God's order for His church. This understanding and practice is the source of the measure of freedom that was tasted for a short season here upon this continent.

Consider the Ten Commandments. All the commandments are different ways of saying, "Thou shalt not steal." The first and second commandments are about stealing from God that which belongs to Him. Killing your neighbor is stealing his life, second only in importance to stealing his conscience. Lying about your neighbor is stealing his reputation, his good name. Committing adultery is theft of the worst kind. And the tenth commandment says, "Don't even want to take for yourself that integrity, that honor, that regard that belongs to your neighbor."

But it is my life that I hold as one of my possessions that is second in importance to my conscience. My body comes third (that is the place of habeas corpus in the American Constitution and in British common law.) Both Habeas Corpus and the 14th amendment protect my right to the possession of my own body. My right to speak what is in my heart, my possession of a voice, that sharing with others that which is inside of me, is placed second after freedom of conscience in the Bill of Rights. Whether my voice or my life is more important, I do not know.

God considers my possession of my body to be second to my possession of my own spirit (conscience). For my body is the temple of the Holy Spirit and belongs to no other. If I do not possess it fully, I cannot give it to God. And God accepts only that which is freely given.

Do you see how all this works? Americans used to understand these things, but since 1913, almost no one still does.

So why was the Bill of Rights written? Again, this reality is not known, even though it is supremely important.

Tens of thousands of Americans who loved freedom were horror-stricken when the "Constitution" was presented to them to ratify in the legislative assemblies of each newly-independent state. They saw in that Constitution the creation of the awful BEAST that the American government is today. They saw in that Constitution the license to create a monster a thousand times worse than the government of King George ever could be.

There were too many people who opposed this betrayal called "the Constitution" for it to be ratified. Those who opposed it gave their reasons at the legislative assemblies and they wrote those reasons down on paper. Those who had written the Constitution sent out papers giving their reasons why the new government created by the Constitution could be trusted. Both sides have been proven wrong by history. The arguments of those who claimed that the new government could be trusted fell into the dustbin of history long ago as complete and total deception. But the arguments of those who claimed that the new government would be a worse tyrant than King George ever could be were also wrong. That government today is far, far worse than their darkest predictions. It is a Beast.

The Bill of Rights was written by those who OPPOSED the constitution and who OPPOSED the creation of the Federal Government. It was written as a final attempt to wrap chains around that government, to somehow force it to respect people. Those who wanted the Constitution accepted the Bill of Rights only because it was the only way the states would have ratified the Constitution to create the monster that did not stop growing from then until now. By the presidency of Abraham Lincoln, that Constitution and the Bill of Rights restraining it was nothing more than a worthless scrap of paper.

Please bear with me, because the only thing I am interested in is "Members One of Another." But we must understand exactly what that means. This letter will obviously require two parts. But I have a bit further to go before I can come back to the utter regard and respect for one another that is the heart of what Christ is all about.

The Shawnees in their savagery had exactly the same reasons why they should kill the whites as the colonists had to fight King George. They had exactly the same reasons, only far more. If it was "right" for the colonists to kill the British soldiers, by the same argument, it was far more "right" for the Shawnees to be as savage at killing the Europeans and driving them into the sea as they needed to be.

Those Shawnees who kidnapped Mary Ingles and slaughtered her neighbors were truly terrorists. But not as bad as the white terrorists who had done the same and worse to the Shawnees.

To Christ in Mary Ingles, the actions of the Shawnees against her and against those whom she loved had no bearing on the regard and respect, the love, of Christ in her towards them.

Would you have had the same regard and respect for Osama Bin Laden and Saddam Hussein while they were still alive? If not, you really do not know the One who loves inside of you, the One you call "Savior." You really do not know Him.

More than that, if you had the opportunity, would you place your body in between the American soldiers and the Afghanis they are shooting right now because of your deep respect, your high regard, and your love for that Afghani man, bearded, dirty, and smelly? Would you place your body there to take the blow and the death in his place?

If you would not, then you do not know God, you have never experienced Love, and you do not know the Christ who is inside of you. He is there, you just don't know Him. You are under complete deception; you live in total darkness.

You might say, "Well, Daniel Yordy, what about you?"

And my answer would be, "I don't know that I could do that either." And my answer would also be, "Yes, Jesus lives in my heart because He says He does, but I do not know Him, not really; I am under complete deception, and I live in total darkness."

There was a Man, once, who saw it differently. There was a Man, once, who refused to participate in the vicious satanic cycle of "dog eat dog," of beast devouring beast.

They threatened Him with death and He laid down His life. They cried, "If you were truly the Son of God, you would come down off that cross." He said, "Father, forgive them, for they do not know what they do."

He was the only Man who has ever lived on this earth.

And that one act, of standing between His enemies and the destruction they so richly deserved, broke the curse. That one act saved you and me. We were truly His enemies when He died for us, and in dying, made us His friends. We were truly His enemies, terrorists against all that is holy and good, when He responded to us with utmost respect, with careful and tender regard, with life-laid-down love.

And now, that same One, the only Man ever to live, the Holy One of heaven who lives now in our hearts, though we know Him not, that same One says these words to you and to me:

"Receive one another, just as Christ also received us - Love one another with a pure heart fervently."

I want to keep the same title, "Members One of Another," but in the next part, I want to explore more deeply this high, holy respect and regard for one another, this tender care for one another's heart, this "going out of our way" to make sure each tiny member of Christ knows how highly we respect and regard their heart and the integrity of their person.

And I want to show you how it is that this massive and "violent" revolution is the only thing that will transform this world and change the ages forever.

To think that it will happen because "Jesus" shows up in the sky is as contrary to the nature and determination of God as one can get.

"That they all may be one, (just) as You, Father, are in Me, and I in You; that they also may be one in Us, that the world may believe that You sent Me. And the glory which You gave Me I have given them, that they may be one just as We are one: I in them, and You in Me; that they may be made perfect in one, and that the world may know that You have sent Me, and have loved them as You have loved Me."

This is the revolution that will overthrow all darkness and transform the entire universe as God purposed from the beginning.

What Is Flesh? - Part Two. Brett Burrowes.John Crowder

Brett Burrowes complete transcript/ or alternatively the original spoken mp3 can be obtained here:http://www.zerubbabel.org/audio/sin-satan-and-the-flesh.asp

He begins:

I'm going to talk today about sin, the flesh and Satan in the Bible. I have been writing, or have written a dissertation on Paul and the law and sin in Romans 7 & 8, it's titled Christ the Living Law, Paul's Transformation of the Law From Letter to Spirit of Christ in Romans 7-8. And I had two sets of purposes in writing the dissertation, one was more academic and the other was more theological or doctrinal.
It really all started back oh about 20 years ago when I went through a Church split over some teachings at this fellowship in NY. And the teachings involved about Satan and Christ, whether sin was a result of a sinful human nature that we have or was it Satan expressing his own nature through us and did we live our lives with the help of the Spirit of Christ of course or was it Christ himself and no longer I living the Christian life? And as Galatians 2:20 says. And it was very disturbing to me that these Christians that I thought cared about me turned on us and walked to the other side of the street and treated us with what I saw was hate rather than Christian love and kindness. And at one point I stood up, probably in ignorance, but I stood up and said to the Church just shortly before I left what Galatians 2:20 meant to me and how Norman Grubb had thrown light on that verse to me and on Romans 7. But I was shaken by what happened and I didn't really, I knew it at one level but not at a level where I felt secure in what I believed. And so I decided to go to seminary to find out for myself what the Bible said, what it meant in the original languages and not that I was just going to take all my seminary professors word for it, but, I wanted, I had to know for myself what the truth was and if the truth was that what Norman was telling me was wrong then I was going to accept it because it was what the Bible said that I knew the bible was the word of God and that was the starting point and the foundation of everything else. And I believe that to be my foundation to this day and the foundation of our fellowship.



+++++++++++++++++++++++



ACWelchAll through history God has called towards His believers by means of revelation surrounding Biblical Truth, which is after all only a mirror of True Heavenly Realities to do with the Living Version of the Tabernacle as briefly and I mean briefly outlined in the book of Hebrews.


Now for the Anabaptists it was the discovery of the "living" dynamic to be experienced in total immersion baptism by believers, in an age still almost universally saddled with the belief that you tapped babies on the forehead with some sprinkled water.



In the last century, pioneers of the healing movement like Alexander Dowie were regularly fined by the Chicago municipality for practicing medicine!(It's actually called praying for the sick and it is in your Bibles- though probably not the Episcopalian ones....only joking)) And Dowie kept paying. Added to this, the government did not honour or acknowledge their own health savings as literally thousands were either instantly or rapidly healed of their ailments.



By my reckoning, the Church of Jesus Christ in Chicago are owed millions of pounds in compensation and interest by the central authorities!!!! And we are coming into the time of the restoration of all things!






GIVE THAT KINGDOM MONEY BACK,CHICAGO!





Later on the Pentecostals and Apostolic Churches were universally rejected for preaching and experiencing both the baptism of the Spirit, and the reinstatement of ministries long abandoned by the Church at large:apostles and prophets.







Well then, we come to the last 30 years or so where the matter has been surrounding Galations 2:20. Do you believe it? Or don't you? And the taking on board of living revelation is always perceived by outsiders as extreme. But from the point of view of those who have heard the word of the Lord, it is just a simple matter of obedience.






As it was for Noah when he built his boat. There had never been a need for a boat. There had never been any rain. And when it began raining, IT BEGAN RAINING. You definitely needed to be in that boat!






If you are reading this for the first time, wondering about Christian believers. Can I just say, you need to be hanging around them. Because Christians get advance warnings about things. So instead of mocking them and crossing to the other side of the street, can I suggest you shut up your bad mouthing, you quietly tag along, and listen to what they are going on about. They could just be building the next boat. Rant over - Brett continues:



+++++++++++++++++++++++



.............Now the protestant reformation though it was successful in reestablishing that God's salvation is by God's grace alone and received by faith alone, didn't deal with the problem of the continued sinning of believers. It only dealt with the means by which we're saved and go to heaven. In fact, Luther and Calvin the reformers emphasized we continue to sin constantly which drives us to trust Christ more and not our own works for our salvation. The reformers would have been hostile to the belief that Christ can live out His sin-free life through us. They would not have welcomed that and would have seen it as sort of maybe a sneaky way that salvation by works could sneak back in but in fact we believe that salvation is by God's grace alone and we can do nothing to earn our salvation. And so that's not in doubt, we're starting from that as our basis.



......... my strategy is to show that evangelical interpretations of sin and the flesh and Paul, are based upon a later interpretation of Paul by St. Augustine in the early 5th century AD and are not original to the apostle Paul himself. And also, that when Paul is interpreted in his Jewish and Greek context of the first century AD, the idea that sin is a spirit is a more natural way to understand what Paul was saying.






............Now probably the most important view of sin, that I disagree with, is that of Augustine who viewed sin as a corruption of human nature or of the flesh. Corruption is when something has deteriorated from it's original state of wholeness. Rust would be a corruption of iron or steel so immorality would be a corruption of the human body and of human nature. So in Augustine's view human nature, which is originally pristine and perfect before the fall, was corroded or corrupted by Adam's original sin. Specifically, the corruption of human nature was the introduction of excessive or inordinate desire into human nature. A physical desires, especially the desire to pursue pleasure and avoid pain, became much more extreme and out of whack, so to speak. Now in Augustine's view we're self-operating but we can only choose what we desire and if our desires are out of control we find ourselves unable to stop sinning because we can't change our desires to make them the right desires. So for Augustine it is the flesh that is the problem. The flesh is corrupted by sin and sin doesn't literally indwell the flesh like a spirit indwells a body, rather sin indwells the flesh the way that you see rust corroding iron and gradually causing it to deteriorate and fall apart.
I should back up a minute and explain, well, who is St. Augustine and why is he so important? Augustine is important because all of Western Christian theology- Catholic and Protestant-as opposed to Christianity in Eastern Europe, Russia, Greece and the middle east, all of Western Christian theology is based on Augustine. Most people do not realize that and probably think that, well, no my theology is all based upon the new testament. And they might give a nod to Luther or Calvin or the Reformers but little do they realize that the Reformers themselves based their theology on Augustine's interpretation of the Bible as did most Catholic writers as well, in fact probably all Catholic and Protestant writers. This makes him, gives him almost unparalleled importance in the history of Christianity apart from the writers of the New Testament, because everybody in western Christianity, Catholic and Protestant, sees and reads the Scriptures with the lenses or eyeglasses of St. Augustine. We read it naturally in that way and don't realize or even know that we're doing it. So he is perhaps, there's no more important figure in the history of Christian theology than St. Augustine other than the writers of the Bible. That means that all of Christian theology since the time of Augustine, who lived around 354 to 430 AD, is basically a commentary on Augustine, virtually without exception, whether Protestant or Catholic. That doesn't mean all protestants agree with everything Augustine wrote or all Catholics agree with Augustine, but everyone is in someway either building on or reacting to Augustine.
So as I was saying, it's as if we read the Bible with colored contact lenses on and we're not even aware that we have them on, so that Augustine is causing us to read and understand Paul through that color, like we're seeing the world through blue eye glasses and everything appears blue in Paul because that's how Augustine has led us to read it. Since almost all doctrinal disputes between Christians go back to disagreements in the interpretation of Paul, if Augustine controls our interpretation of Paul, how great is that influence?
Some of the Catholic doctrines with which Protestants disagree also go back to theologians working out the implications of Augustine's doctrine of sin and sinful human nature, such as purgatory. For example, if we are not finished being made sanctified, our human nature is not sufficiently purified by our death, then what do we do? What happens? Do we just go up unfinished our process of sanctification into heaven? Well Catholics then decided we must go through purgatory to finish the process of sanctification to get into heaven. There's a certain logical sense to that. If there's a sinful human nature and it's not perfected by the time we die, then it has to be perfected after we die. Protestants have sort of lived with the contradiction. The same as with the immaculate conception of Mary, that well if Jesus was born of the Virgin Mary who had a sinful human nature why didn't he inherit a sinful human nature? And so Catholics invented the doctrine of immaculate conception to solve the problem of Jesus' sinlessness. That why he didn't inherit a sinful human nature from Mary. Protestants again sort of live with that contradiction and probably don't even realize that there is one. Of course I think that we have a much simpler solution by discarding the sinful human nature problem then the problem that created purgatory and immaculate conception completely disappear. Because there's no sinful nature to be purified or sanctified and there's not sinful nature for Jesus to inherit, therefore there's no need for these doctrines.
Now in Augustine's favor, he was the champion of the idea of salvation by God's grace alone, not by human works. Luther was merely reviving Augustine on this point. Augustine wrote extensively hundreds of pages on this point and was absolutely clear and I'm not sure exactly why the Church didn't always follow him but he was sufficiently read by at least those who could read, that people understood what his point about salvation by God's grace alone was.






.........To summarize, Augustine's view of sinful human nature has four sources. He was reacting against his former Manichean views of an evil deity while at the same time adopting their idea that humans have two natures in conflict with each other. Two, he was reacting against Pelagius's perfectionism and salvation by works. The third source of his view of sinful human nature is that his status as a man educated in Greek philosophy led him to view human beings as being operated by one of two spirits as being superstitious and unlearned or uneducated and fourth, and perhaps most importantly, fundamental changes were occurring in the Western Church as a result of Constantine's making Christianity a legal religion in 312 and Christianity becoming the official religion of the Roman empire in 380AD. And at this time many thousands of educated and upper class people found it politically wise or expedient to become Christians. If Christianity was the official religion then it was necessary to become Christian in order to succeed in public life, whether that meant political office or just economically, or in business. Christian theology changed to fit this situation. Perhaps not consciously but nevertheless it did so and since Augustine came from this very class of people I think at some level his theology changed or he changed Christian theology in order to fit his situation.







........So lets go back to the meaning of the word flesh.
In Greek the word is Sarx. Some modern Evangelical translations, the New International Version, or the New Living Translation, use sinful nature or old nature, and this is an example of Augustine's theology being read into the text because there's nothing about the word Sarx that means sinful nature or old nature.






....Now, flesh then normally has the sense of human bodily nature, unless of course it refers to animal flesh. It refers to the human body and soul and it's abilities or lack of them. It includes bodily appetites, desires, emotions and feelings. But we must be careful not to just read Augustine's theology of a corrupted human nature or corrupted body into the word of God. Flesh refers to human bodily nature as indwelt by the spirit of sin which has invaded or taken up residence there. So the big difference between Augustine and myself is whether sin is a deterioration of human bodily nature or whether it is an invasion of human bodily nature by an outside spirit distinct from the human self which has come in and taken over. There's nothing in the word flesh or Sarx that demands either interpretation, it just means human bodily nature and as a result of sin, whatever it is, and we'll get to that in a moment, the flesh stands in opposition to God.



...............And so it seems that the writers of Scripture and Paul himself, held to the idea that disease was caused by evil spirits. Augustine on the other hand, who comes from more of the educated classes, is fond of describing sin as some kind of wound to the body. And so he gravitates naturally to the idea of sin, the first idea of sin as a deterioration, or a corruption of the body. And a corruption is sort of the like, kind of a natural deterioration like rust is a corruption of iron but in this case it's a moral deterioration rather than a physical deterioration. In this view Satan wounded human nature and the body at the Fall, he didn't actually enter in to it and indwell it. Paul however, his view fits more the idea of being invaded by some kind of evil spirit. As I've said before, Paul expresses a view of disease in 2 Corinthians 12:7 where he says the thorn in his flesh was an emissary of Satan. Somehow an emissary of Satan has entered his body or a messenger of Satan causing disease. In Romans 5:12 Paul says sin entered into or invaded the world. In Romans 7:17 & 20 Paul distinguishes sin from himself, it is no longer I who sin and not I who do the sin. He distinguishes sin from the flesh in Romans 8:3. They're not identical. Sin takes up residence and indwells human flesh just the way a demonic spirit would in Romans 7:17 & 20 and just like an enemy invader would, sin takes us captive and makes us do it's will in Romans 7:23. Sin produces evil desires but it's not identical with those evil desires in Romans 7 & 8. And in Romans 8:15 sin is described as a spirit of slavery. So Paul outright identifies sin as a spirit in Romans 8:15. Some translations try to reduce that to a mere attitude or mindset but since the Holy Spirit the Spirit of adoption is a real Spirit which comes to dwell in us no one would say that the Holy Spirit is part of our human selves, or some human attitude, so the same is true of the spirit of slavery, it is a spirit which comes from the outside and invades us. And of course Ephesians 2:2 is the most clear of all in which Paul describes how we all once walked under the authority of the prince of the power of the air, the spirit which now operates in the children of disobedience. And the operation of this spirit is associated with the desires of the flesh, the Satan operated body which produces the distorted desires and appetites of the flesh. And finally Paul can describe the body as the body of sin, Romans 6:6, because it is the body that sin indwells or inhabits. ...........


...............So as you can see, even our modern translations are influenced greatly by Augustine's theology. Now I'm not saying that the NIV or the New Living Translations are overall terrible translations or that you should never use any part of them, I'm just saying that when it comes to the apostle Paul and specifically passages about sin, the flesh, and the Spirit of Christ operating us, that's when they read Augustine's theology into the text. There's other parts of Scripture where thy are perfectly fine in the way they interpret and translate the Bible. But I think it is important that we be aware that translation can influence our theology and we're not even aware or the theology can influence translation and we're not necessarily aware that it's doing that and then influence the way that we understand what's happening when we're being tempted and why we find that life may not work the way that the Bible says it is supposed to work.
So in summary, the flesh is just bodily human nature which has been taken over or invaded by a spirit, the spirit of error, the spirit of Satan, the spirit of sin or the spirit of slavery in various parts of Scripture. Sin itself is not something that has gone wrong with human nature, it is not some psychological principle, it is not a corruption of human nature. Sin is an invading spirit, what Paul calls the prince of the power of the air the spirit which is now at work in the children of disobedience. So sin is the spirit of Satan operating in us, operating in our flesh, while we were unbelievers, but fortunately for us Christ came and died to expel that spirit from us, from operating us, in his death on the cross and when we believe in that, believe in Christ's redemption of us and participate in his death to sin and his resurrection, then the old spirit goes out and we are joined to the new spirit, the Spirit of Christ, by whom we are now to be operated through our faith in Him as Paul says in Galatians 2:20, it is no longer I who live but Christ who lives in me, and the life I now live I live by faith or rather by the faithfulness of the Son of God who loved me and gave Himself for me. And so our faith in His faithfulness are what enables Christ to live his life through us just as sin or the spirit of Satan once lived his quality of life through us. Brett Burrows message ends.
There are huge chunks missed out for brevity. I firmly recommend that those who want to get a handle on some of the historical distortions spend time studying the whole message.


+++++++++++++++++++++++++++



Gnosticism extract from Miracle workers,Reformers and the New Mystics by John Crowder




Gnosticism, or gnostic docetism, claims that all physical matter is evil, and all spirit is good. It denies that Jesus came in the flesh, professing that He was only a spiritual being. Since the flesh is made of matter, it is therefore" evil." But we know that unless Jesus became a man like us, He could not have died for us. He had to become like us in every way, yet be without sin, in order to bear our sin and bridge the gap between God and humanity.This is foundational. The apostle John—who preaches against gnosticism more than anyone else in Scripture—makes it clear that "the Word became flesh and made His dwelling among us" (John 1: 14). The incarnation of Christ is the very crux of the gospel—God became one of us, in order to save us.
Gnostics also believed that man is saved by attaining a special, secret knowledge. This is important to remember, to see how it'stied to the religious spirit. It takes the focus off the cross, and puts it on our own works. Gnosticism comes from the word gnosis "to know." By a process of learning and attaining a hidden understand­ing, gnostics think they can save themselves.This puts the focus on our own attainment and "head knowledge" rather than on Jesus.
How is this relevant to us today? Gnosticism is not just a strong­hold behind secular intellectualism. Gnosticism is the main dish served at most seminaries and Bible schools today. It is the Captain Crunch of most Sunday morning services (by knowing more about God, or even memorizing the Bible, you are saved—versus knowing God relationally or experientially). It is heart belief—not a head trip—that is counted as saving faith.
... if you confess with your mouth, 'Jesus is Lord," and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved. For it is with your heart that you believe and are justified, and it is with your mouth that you con­fess and are saved (Romans 10:9-10).
The idolatry of godly knowledge can even cause us to worship the Bible, rather than the God of the book. Knowing about God is not the same as knowing God. I can know lots of facts about a per­son, but until I meet him, I do not really know him. An overempha­sis on "head knowledge" versus "heart knowledge" is gnostic. This spirit will also cause us to try and figure out all our spiritual prob­lems, without ever actually taking them to the cross. It is a form of godliness that denies the power (2 Tim. 3:5). It produces hearers of the Word, but not doers of the Word.
We recognize this critter most obviously as that unnatural, over-pious, uptight religious monkey That's because it goes against what is normal and natural and human, and calls the contorted result "holy." It tries to make you ascend to God, rather than believe Jesus already came to you. It manipulates the exterior, to appear-spiritu­al." Religion exalts a mode of self-denial, while never dealing a death blow to the root heart issues of pride and fear.

Our embrace of the cross is not just an embrace of death. It is the embrace of hope in a greater resurrection. We have no guaran­tee that sacrifice will be fun. But the chief end of Christians is not just to make sacrifices. Our objective is to enjoy God, come what may. Religion worships self death. We worship the Lord......

.....while Augustine surely made remarkable contributions to the Christian faith, he also brought a gnostic influence to mainstream Christianity. Augustine believed the entire world was altogether fallen, to the point that nature itself was basically sinful. His beliefs resurfaced centuries later, influencing reformer John Calvin's teachings that man is completely depraved apart from conversion.
It is one thing to say all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God. It is entirely another thing to say everything is utterly cor­rupted. Surely we can do nothing of positive, eternal consequence apart from Christ, but there is a basic, inherent value in the natural realm that cannot be denied. There is original sin, but there is also a measure of original innocence. Eastern Orthodox theologians respect Augustine, but like many in the West, they do not believe this doctrine of "intrinsic
impairment" to be necessary. In Romans 7:18, the apostle Paul says, "I know that nothing good lives in me, that is, in my sinful nature." The key term to remember here is "sinful nature"—it is the nature of our wicked hearts, not the natural realm itself, which is evil. We live a paradox as Christians. On one hand, we realize we are utterly worthless apart from Christ, and on the other hand, we carry the full worth of God Himself.His inability to separate the sinful nature from healthy natural desires probably explains why Augustine was a self-admittedly tor­tured man in the area of sexuality. Had he acknowledged the inher­ent good in proper marital relations, it is possible that a foundation would have been laid for future clergy. Augustine burned with lust, but he would not marry., contrary to the apostolic teachings. Legalistic abstinence only opens the door for temptations toward aberrant behavior.Augustine's pivotal role in early Christian theolo­gy possibly explains the Catholic church's consistent inability to find balance in areas of sexuality in ministry that remains today. While we should not paint a broad target over our Catholic broth­ers, it is scripturally clear that abstinence from marriage was never a requirement for ministers in the apostolic writings.Peter himself whom Catholics regard as the first Pope, took a wife.

We can boil down the gnostic influence on the church today into a three-fold cord that we must overcome:We are, saved by "knowing." Knowing lots of Christian infor­mation and theology has been a substitute for relationship with God.We even know our problems and are aware of the sin we struggle with, but fail to take it to the cross or actu­ally repent. Our level of knowledge far outweighs our level of obedience. Hearers, but not doers.
Leads to death or indulges the flesh. Our humanity is not evil, although we do have a sin nature that must be dealt with. We are to deny ourselves, but not become masochists. The religious spirit will try to make you kill yourself, versus submitting to the Lord and letting Him purify you. We are called to embrace His refining fire, but not go looking for persecution and death. Religion's end is suicide. The oppo­site extreme here would be to take grace as a license to sin, and think that sins of the flesh are not important since we have spiritual salvation.
The spirit realm seems out of reach. We feel "chained" in our bodies, because we have an underlying belief that we are evil and sinful.This prevents us from naturally flowing in the supernatural realm. We are unable to see God's glory in the simple things of life, and are more aware of an unclean­ness around us than we are of God's presence.
It does not take much "discernment" to point out these flaws with the body, but our main task is to build up the church and focus.

on the Lord—not criticize and focus on the enemy's work. Fortunately, as we become full to the brim with the real anointing, and turn our eyes to the living Christ, these strongholds are going to topple.
Our bent toward the natural realm should be to somehow see the glory of God in all things. Remember that we are made in God's image. Ever wondered what God looks like? You look like Him in a lot of ways. Even the natural realm reflects God. God created matter, and nature is not utterly corrupted. We should have an eye for redeeming even those things which are used for evil.When God cre­ated the earth, He saw that it was good. This is because the very earth declared His majesty. And there is a higher purpose in store for the earth that prompted God to redeem it.Although we may not always be aware of it, "the whole earth is full of His glory" (Isa. 6:3). Keep in mind that this verse was written after the fall, yet it is still truth. The Kingdom of God is always just at hand—within fingertip reach even while we are in this world—the problem is, His glory usually goes unnoticed.
Like Elisha's servant, we need our eyes opened to the spirit realm, even amid this earthly reality. Heaven is already touching earth, we are just not aware of it. We need to manifest this reality. One day, the earth will also be filled with the knowledge of the glory of the Lord, as the waters cover the sea (see Hab. 2:14). That is, one day we will be aware of the omnipresent God who is already in our midst. It is not that the angelic realm will step into our world, but that we will enter more into theirs through a consciousness—an awareness—of God's reality.That, after all, is faith. Believing in the unseen. There will be such an acute consciousness of God's glory that we will see His reflection everywhere we look, even amid out mundane, natural circumstances.
We often pray for God's glory to come. But we should be asking to see and know the glory that is already at hand. We are not tc pull Heaven down from some hazy, unreachable place. Heaven is already within us—we must learn to release it through simple belief.