Well I can say for certain, that God's speaking to me was in no way new revelation. I appreciate your response Wes, as it mirror what I heard over there. However, I also see the reasoning as solid, but misapplied. Like I said, this is in no way extra biblical revelation we're talking about. It's just the same calling anyone else gets for salvation or preaching, only I heard words in my head with it. It was not, or is not in any way extra biblical revelation. Nor does it encourage me to stay out of the word. It was simply a "this is what I want you to do" type of message. I also agree that the gifts of the Spirit have ceased since Biblical times.

So to clear up, there was no revelation involved, nor was there any "slaying" in the Spirit like the Pentecostal movement. Just a calling with words only I could hear.

I've never given it a thought before because all the objections I'm hearing were never anywhere reality with this. I agree with all the points. Cessation of gifts, closed cannon, no new revelation. I didn't see God speaking to me as a violation of any of those because none of those were happening. Yet, when I say "God spoke to me", people automatically say He couldn't have because if He did, then those would have to be happening.

Is that possible? Can God speak to someone just telling them what to do and it not be new revelation? After all, he's not revealing anything, just commanding something. People talk about being led by the Spirit. But who says that has to be just by feelings and not simple words as well? What is the difference between being compelled and being told? The end result is the same. God's will is communicated to his child.

Yes via_dolorosa, what I heard does line up with God's character and His word. It was a call to salvation, a call to preach, and a command to give Him my undivided attention.

Greg