Visions of Disaster (3)

The situation on earth has changed since Old Testament times. The Holy Spirit was not released then, because Jesus had not come, so God had to work in less effective ways against evil. He drove out evil nations living close to his people. He destroyed evil empires that were becoming too powerful.

Since the cross, God has a much better weapon in his arsenal: The good news and the Holy Spirit. He prefers to use them to bring down evil nations and empires. The Western church does not understand that and still wants to use the redundant methods. If the US had paid 100,000 people, equipped to share the gospel of the kingdom in the power of the Spirit, to Iraq, Iran and Afghanistan, they would have had far better results than their military achieved.

Although God does not want to destroy peoples and cultures, he will destroy alternative power centres. The institutional church was an alternative power centre distracting attention from the Holy Spirit. God is allowing it to collapse.

Human governments are the strongest alternative power centre in our age. God will eventually destroy government power, so the Holy Spirit power is welcomed and released

Sometime a culture will becomes so evil that God is shut out of it. When that happens, the power of evil will have a free hand, and the culture will destroy itself. God will warn of what is happening, but he can’t stop it. But New Zealand, and the US, is a long way from that.

Hearing God's Speaking

Some Christians get excited about visions and dreams. Others get excited about seeing angels or demons. Some are stirred up by visits to the third heaven. These are all important, but they are not the ultimate. God explained to Aaron and Miriam what his priority is for his people.

When there is a prophet among you,
I, the Lord, reveal myself to them in visions,
I speak to them in dreams.
But this is not true of my servant Moses;
he is faithful in all my house.
With him I speak face to face,
clearly and not in riddles (Num 12:6-8).

Prophets I those times saw dreams and visions. With Moses, who was also a prophet, God took it to a new level. He spoke to Moses face to face, or translating the Hebrew more literally “mouth to mouth”.

This should be our goal. God is a god who speaks. He began creation by speaking. He sent his son, who is the perfect, true word.

We have the Holy Spirit living within us. He loves to speak. We need to listen to him and hear his voice. We should speak to him an ask questions. Dreams and visions are good, but hearing his voice every day is the ultimate. Obeying his voice is even better.

Three Types of Vision

Christians with discernment can receive three types of vision.

1. Some visions show what the people deserve. They show what the wrath of God demands. Eg Amos 7:1.
2. The Holy Spirit sometimes shows his people what Satan wants to do. When people turn away from God, they give him authority to fulfil his plans. He is a destroyer, so these visions are often destructive. Spiritual people who are not Christians may also receive these visions, but from a different source.
3. Some visions show what God is going to do to turn his people back to him, as his wrath is tempered by his mercy. The purpose of these visions is refining and purifying (Amos 7:7-9).

Notes

• They first two types may be the same. Satan has the right to execute the curses of the covenant.
• The first type of visions should be prayed against. The mercy of God should be claimed. (Jer 18:20; Jer 14:21; Dan 9:4-19; Ps 106:23).
• The first type should not be proclaimed as if were God’s will, as this would give the devil permission to do it. If it is announced, it should be conditional. “This is what will happen, if you keep on the way that you are going”
• The second type should be prayed against. We resist the enemy by disagreeing with his words and visions and declaring. “That is not God’s will” (Eph 6:10-18).
• The second type of vision should not be proclaimed as this would give glory to Satan. If Christians agree with this vision, it gives him authority to implement his plans, even if they are contrary to God’s will.
• The third type of vision should be prayed into being. It might still be harsh, but because its purpose it mercy, it is right to pray for it. It is part of God’s refining process. When we declare these visions, it gives God’s authority to do his will on earth.
• A prophet who always looks to God’s wrath is imitating Satan. A true prophet must centre on God’s mercy.
• When a vision is received, we must pray to find what type of vision it is. We must get God’s perspective, before we proclaim the vision.

VVV (2)

In her book called Visions, Visitations and the Voice of God, Lyn Packer warns against ranking different types of revelation.

I don’t believe that any particular way of hearing or seeing is necessarily superior to another. Revelation is revelation and no one way of receiving is more spiritual than any other. For example, a thought picture/impression inspired by God can be as weighty and profound as a trance vision.

Likewise, you don’t need a higher level of spiritually to hear in particular ways from God; you simply have to be open to receive.

Some ways of receiving may be more impressive or dramatic to our natural mind, but that doesn’t make them better. All the ways we receive are equally valid.

While opened-eyed visions are definitely more dramatic to receive, I have sometimes been more deeply impacted by some of the faint impression I have received from the Lord.

In fact, the God-given subtle impression and thoughts sometimes require greater faith to walk in than the more dramatic God encounters. Lean into those impressions, chase them down – they often contain deep riches and mysteries.

She refers to research about the way that well-known prophets and prophetic people hear God.

The most common way they receive those weighty revelations is through the still small voice of God, or the internal visual impression.

At the same time, we should desire and ask for all the different ways of receiving revelation to be opened up to us.

Why does God speak in a still, small voice? One reason is that it sharpens our listening skills and causes us to draw closer to the Lord to hear him. It brings us to a place of stillness, so we can listen for Him to speak, and it stretches and grows our faith.

I believe that with faith, practice and persistence, we can all see and hear with great clarity, and frequency than we do at present.

VVV (1)

I have been reading Visions, Visitations and the Voice of God by Lyn Packer. It is a good book. Here are some quotes.

Our physical senses are not always a true indicator, or interpreter, of what is happening in the spiritual realm.

Sometimes people tell me that they don’t hear God speak to them. However, the issue is not whether we can hear God’s voice (because scripture tells us that we can). The real issue is learning to recognise God’s voice when he speaks to us.

I used to believe that spiritual experiences, like visions, were sovereign acts of God. I thought I had to wait until God felt like give me an experience before I would have one. But I have since discovered that experience with God and revelation can be accessed by faith, just I access everything else in my Christian walk by faith. Of course, Gold still can and does give me revelation sovereignly.

Often, revelation will be received through multiple senses simultaneously. Some people will find certain senses are better developed than others, but they can all be developed with time and practice.

All experiences in the Kingdom of God are available to us, because of what Jesus has done on the cross. Experience is not dependant on our feeling or how mature we are, but wisdom tells us that we need to be growing in maturity to rightly discern and interpret what we see and hear.

Publishing Dreams and Visions

When publishing a dream and a vision, it is important to separate the dream or vision from the interpretation. If the Lord gave some interpretation during the dream, then that should be spelt out clearly too.

The person who had the dream or vision knows what they saw, so there cannot be any debate about the content. They should know what they saw.

However, there can be debate about whether the dream came from God, or the forces of evil, or was just the working of the dreamers mind. Dreams and vision should be tested by the body of Christ to establish that they have come from God.

Unless the Holy Spirit gives a specific interpretation and application during the dream or vision, the interpretation of a dream or vision can be open to debate. Sometimes the person who receives the dream or vision may not be the best person to provide interpretation. Joseph and Daniel were prophetic people who were skilled in interpreting the dreams of other people.

I see many dreams and visions on prophetic websites, where the person has received a valid revelation, but seems to have got the interpretation wrong. In these situations, someone else in the body of the Christ may have the interpretation. If the interpretation is mixed up with published account of the dream, it becomes difficult to suggest an alternative interpretation, without questioning the inspiration of what has been published.

I believe that the best practice is to record accurately the dream and vision as received, and then give the interpretation separately. This was Daniels approach in Daniel 7 and 8. In the first part of the chapter he describes what he saw. He then gives the interpretation that was given to him by the angel. Not only did he keep the description and the interpretation separate, he did not give his own interpretation or application at all.

The book of Revelation is similar. John recorded all that he saw very carefully and precisely. He rarely gives any interpretation (except for stars are angels, lamp stands are churches, waters are people, heads are kings, hills are kings). I presume that the Holy Spirit did not give John the interpretation, so he did not give it.

Most Christians who have a dream or vision to share seem to feel bound to give the interpretation and application at the same time. Moreover, the content and the interpretation are often mixed up together. For example, when reading John Paul Jackson’s Perfect Storm, it is quite difficult to discern what he actually saw and what is his interpretation and application (I am not questioning the validity of what he saw?).

Mixing up the dream and the interpretation makes it hard to assess the source of the dream. It also makes it hard to assess the interpretation. Likewise if the dream or vision is not described clearly without interpretation, it is very difficult for a person who is gifted in interpreting dreams and visions to give an alternative vision, because they do not have all the material that they need.

To progress in the prophetic, the body of Christ must be come better at distinguishing between vision and interpretation. Similarly, we must get much better at separating what the Lord said from what we think it means.