Prophetic word for today
Bearers absent, bears present (Part 1)
First posted: April 18, 2010
E-mailed: February 13, 2010
Word received by: Cecile MacGregor
I wanted to share with you a dream I had last night. Actually, I have a few other dreams, one from a few nights ago and a few that I had months, even years ago that I have now remembered since reading some of your articles, but I guess I feel "called" to share the one I had last night first, even though the other ones happened first.
It was not a very long or complicated dream, at least not what I can remember of it; there may be more that I was not able to remember. I was in a woman's house. It reminded me of the house where I went to dog-sit a neighbor's two little dogs when the owners went on a cruise for vacation about a month ago. I stayed with them for about a week. Their names are Benjamin and Gerald. I don't know if that means anything, but, when I was there with them, I tended to call them by their full names, even though their owners call them just "Ben and Jerry", like the ice cream (the dogs are brothers from the same litter, but look a little different; they think they had different fathers). I just wanted to give them nicknames as a term of endearment because they are such sweet, well-behaved dogs, but I couldn't seem to think of any (beyond just calling them "sweetheart" and "angel" and such things). So, for some reason I just started calling them by their "full" names, even though I do not know for sure that they are even registered under those names or just "Ben and Jerry".
Anyway, the dogs were not in the dream, nor were the owners, my neighbors that live there. It just reminded me of their house (actually an apartment in a condo building), although it was different. Another woman was there, it was her house, and I was there with my mom and some other people, and she did not seem happy for us to be there. It wasn't really my idea to be there, though, I think it was my mom's. I remember thinking that it was typical of my mom that she is one to always abide by "neighborly" manners and such things and does not like to "invite herself" places or like the idea of people who do that without any invitation. But, on occasion, she does things and says things that are so opposite to that and "puts her nose where it doesn't belong" (Which is one of the phrases I picked up from her that she used to use a lot --- she kind of has a repertoire). As long as it does not look bad on the outside, to the outside world, or like she has crossed any boundary, it does not seem to matter much to her if she crosses other peoples' boundaries and rights, etc.
I would like to stress that my father is the exact same way. Although I do realize that in your articles about the Bible, the "female" and "male" issues are not literal but a metaphor, and you are not trying to "keep women down", I do not know if it means anything that my mom was present in the dream and my father was not, even though they seem to share the same philosophy (which, to me, is a broken and tainted one) in real life.
Anyway, I was at this woman's house because of my mom, and the woman did not seem to want us to be there (as I said, there were others "visiting" besides my mom and myself, but I don't know who they were, just that they were there), and she had all these pets in the house. She had horses (I think they were ponies or miniature horses though; maybe that was more acceptable to keep them inside an apartment? ) and dogs and I bent down to pet what I thought was either a horse or a dog, I don't remember, but when I got closer to the animal, I realized it was actually a bear, a black bear to be exact. I was a little afraid because I have always been a little against keeping "exotic" wild animals as domestic pets; it's dangerous to the animals as well as the people that keep them, and I am very timid against such danger, as hard as I try to be brave. Then, I realized that the bear was actually a cub, just a baby bear and that's why the lady still kept him inside , and I felt a little better about it, but not completely.
In the last part of the dream, I was looking out this lady's window at a beautiful view. I could see full grown bears outside, but it was the landscape that I found so beautiful. I could tell she still wanted to get rid of us, and I was trying to convince my mom to leave and be polite, but, for a moment, I just got entranced by the view out the window and just stood there looking down. This reminded me of when I was dog-sitting for my neighbors. Benjamin, the dog, loves to sit on the arm of the couch in the living room, on the window sill right next to it, and look down on the parking lot and people and other dogs as the world goes by. Jerry (or Gerald) prefers to just sit and cuddle or play inside, but does not look out the window nearly as much, or enjoy walks with quite the same enthusiasm as Ben. Although, occasionally, I would catch them sitting side by side looking out the window.
That is all I can remember about it.
One other thing that I did also want to mention in this same email, though, was to ask about your thoughts on the Super Bowl [Super Bowl 44] a few weeks ago and the opening ceremonies of the [Vancouver] Winter Olympics last night.
Maybe I am reading too much of your website and reading into things (but I doubt you will think so), but I could not help but notice at the very end of the ceremony when they were lighting the torch, and they had a "technical difficulty". One of the four pillars that rose up from the stadium floor wouldn't come up, so they waited for several uncomfortable minutes, and, then, just 3 of the originally intended 4 rose up, and 3 of the 4 Olympians they had picked, raised their torches and lighted them in order to light the big torch. When I saw this, I could not help but think of the 4 horsemen, and that some kind of unexpected "malfunction" of one of the four, was some kind of sign to guide us, good or bad, I don't know. I am guessing that if you watched the ceremonies you might have already noticed this. If not, and it is of any help, then I am glad to help.
I would like to hear your thoughts on it and also on the four Olympians they chose for the ceremony.
The Lord has prompted us to post the reply to this email in two parts: One as a "prophetic word" where we share on the dream per se, and another as a "train of thought" where we share some thoughts (which are rather personal at times) on Super Bowl 44 and the Vancouver torch malfunction. After understanding that this word had to be split into two different types of words, I realised that it correlated with "Benjamin" and "Gerald", who look like they may be different types of dogs, even though they are brothers from the same litter.
These are some of the basic elements in the dream:
In the dream, the dreamer's mother is a figure of those who are sympathetic to the remnant spirit but who refuse to understand the "voluntary welcome" principle. As described above, the mother has an extensive repertoire of phrases. The impression I received in my heart as I read that is that those phrases are like "wisdom clichés", i.e.- catchy phrases that encapsulate simple ideas and are repeated by the general public, and who are accepted by the general public as unquestionable "nuggets of wisdom". Therefore, the mother's "repertoire" points to the clichés of "spiritual" wisdom that Church believers constantly throw around and misuse, thinking that they are being "spiritual" when they use them. One of these "nuggets of wisdom" is the idea that we can force God's visitation on others by just having "enough faith". Why? Because "faith moves mountains". When the visitation does not come, these believers, who are indeed sympathetic to the remnant, think that the remnant just need to apply "more faith", and any consideration by the remnant to "call off" the visitation is seen as "fleshly weakness", "lack of faith", and "giving in to the enemy". These believers ignore the "three-will" principle that we constantly talk about, i.e.- the Biblical principle that states that man has been given authority over what may or may not happen on Earth (Psalm 115:16), and that God does not force His visitation on those whose wills are staunchly against it. As indicated by the Biblical "three-will" principle, man has a say over who is and is not enabled on Earth. He can therefore thwart a visitation by choking off all resources from the weak messengers who bear that visitation. This choking off can be done either through passive indifference or active opposition.
This 3-will principle is made evident in what God said to the disciples in Luke 10:1-12. When the disciples were sent in two's (represented by Benjamin and Gerald in the dream), they were told to wipe the dust off their sandals and curse a city if there was no one there willing to welcome them. God never told them to stick around in the city and continue their "evangelistic pressure" until the city yielded under the weight of their "faith". In fact, He told them that they should flee whenever they were unwelcome and persecuted in a city because "ye shall not have gone over the cities of Israel, till the Son of man be come" (Matthew 10:23). In other words, there is too much territory to cover to be wasting time in a place that is unyielding to His visitation. God has established a "testing parameter" to determine whether a place is worthy of receiving Him, and that parameter is the way that they treat the messengers that He sends them. Those who reject His messengers cloaked in weakness have rejected Him, even if they continue to say with their lips that they love Him and are longing to see Him (Luke 10:13-16). God's visitation is not a mere matter of the remnant being "persistent enough", as the (cliché-riddled) soulish supporters of the remnant may want to believe. It requires a voluntary surrender of those visited, and if the kairos for that surrender is wasted, consequences will come.
As the dreamer shares in her email, the fact that it was her mother, and not her father, who was accompanying her in the dream is a figure of how these believers who are sympathetic to many things of the remnant are inadvertently exposing themselves as people who remain trapped in ("female") soul-centred clichés whenever they urge the remnant to "tough it out" instead of understanding that the remnant's stay hinges on the people in the house voluntarily welcoming them. To the simplistic soul, all that is needed is for God to "want it to happen", yet love requires reciprocity, and it requires the voluntary willingness to fulfil the promises made in the past. The Church is constantly saying to God "We love You and we would do anything to be with You"; yet, when God takes them up on their words and visits them in His unadulterated, Spirit-centred nature, they generally reject Him. As a result, they become more accountable than those in Sodom and Gomorrah because they extended the invitation with their words and caused God to "come down and visit them" for naught.
When the visitation fails to come, it is not God's fault, and it is not the true remnant's fault. It is the fault of the Church that wanted all the work done for them and who did not understand that the visitation required their collective surrender (something that even the "unrighteous" of Nineveh were able to understand when Jonah's green-horse visitation came upon them).
Fellow believer, we continue this word in the train of thought entitled "Bearers absent, bears present (Part 2)".