Thread: Are 'power' prayers helpful? Board: Oblivion / Ship of Fools.


To visit this thread, use this URL:
http://forum.ship-of-fools.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=70;t=025361

---

Posted by AngloCatholicGirl (# 16435) on :
 
I ask this because I have been following a blog on Facebook by someone who is losing a loved one to cancer. The disease is now in the final stages and the question is now around whether they give up on treatment to focus on quality of life.

My unease is that in the comments was one prayer that began 'I command cancer to go now' and carried on in that vein for the rest of the prayer- the commenter was obviously genuinely praying for a healing and that is fine.

But I was unhappy with the aggressive nature of the prayer (it will happen if you just have faith, implying your faith isn't good enough if healing doesn't happen) as barring a miracle the person involved will sadly die soon. I found the prayer upsetting and thought it left no space for the notion that death might be God's healing from pain.

Is this just me being unfamiliar with these types of prayer that makes me feel uncomfortable? Have people found these prayers be quite helpful?
 

---

Posted by AngloCatholicGirl (# 16435) on :
 
My apologies hosts, I seem to have used my usual IT genius when attempting an edit and have instead posted twice. Would you kindly close the duplicate down?
Many thanks and grovelling apologies (promise not to do it again )
 

---

Posted by Nicodemia (# 4756) on :
 
I have always been very uncomfortable with these prayers, and practically writhed visibly when one gentleman of a Pentecostal persuasion prayer over me in such a vein.

And "it" didn't go.

Again, upsetting implication was that I did not have enough faith, and that feeling has beset me for the rest of my Christian (not Pente) life.

If people want to pray for me, I wish they'd go away and do it quietly somewhere else.
 

---

Posted by Lyda*Rose (# 4544) on :
 
"I command..."? That seems a bit mixed up. God's in command, surely. This is where people get faith and magic confused. A person who believes s/he uses magic is in charge of its uses. A person who prays for the power of God's intercession leaves God in charge, no matter the outcome.
 

---

Posted by South Coast Kevin (# 16130) on :
 
I think the justification for this kind of praying is that it's how the early Christians (and Jesus himself) are recorded in the New Testament as praying. 'Be healed', 'Get up and walk' etc.

Also, you look at Jesus' instructions to his followers - 'Heal the sick', 'Cast out demons in my name'. It's not 'Ask God / me to heal the sick'.

But praying this way can set up unrealistic expectations, I think, and I'm sure it can be rather shocking and disconcerting if one isn't expecting it...
 

---

Posted by EtymologicalEvangelical (# 15091) on :
 
I used to be in a small fellowship where there was a tendency to speak to (make proclamations to) demons - sometimes even more than speaking to God. I got the feeling at times that we were getting bored and frustrated with 'normal' prayers, and so we felt that God must be telling us that it was down to us to take command and control of the situation and "exercise our authority" as believers.

I found it very dangerous. I regret to say (and it embarrasses me intensely when I remember those days) that I participated in this, and, in fact (while not the prime mover) was one of the worst culprits.

My advice to anyone is this: don't do it! (unless you really really have a very strong leading from God to do so, and that would only be in exceptional circumstances).

Even if you don't believe in evil spirits, it is still damaging, because, from a psychological point of view, it is manic, and it creates even more frustration and false expectations (as well as stirring up an unacceptably aggressive and confrontational attitude).
 

---

Posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider (# 76) on :
 
What you describe, EE, is what I call "paranoid spirituality". It sees demons behind everything. Everything is interpreted in terms of spiritual warfare, defined as fighting directly against demons, in the way you describe.

Inevitably, more and more things get labelled as conduits for the demonic. Fantasy RPGs are a favourite. Anything with the remotest connection to a non-Christian religion (artefacts brought back from foreign holidays, for example), any ornaments bearing images considered "negative", like snakes or dragons, even fairies...

At its worst it descends into a sort of dualism.
 

---

Posted by South Coast Kevin (# 16130) on :
 
I feel the need to clarify my previous post - I do believe there are malign spiritual forces which one might call demons, but I'm uncomfortable with the idea of seeing demonic influence behind every misfortune. S**t happens, often without any spiritual reason or purpose, IMO.

So I don't go round praying against demons in all sorts of situations, but when we are praying for healing or spiritual comfort I say let's be guided by how the first Christians prayed (and indeed by how Jesus told us to pray).
 

---

Posted by Gamaliel (# 812) on :
 
I'm with EE. A friend of mine's wife lost her faith about three years ago and is now quite antagonistic to all things Christian.

One of the reasons for her loss of faith was the fact that they'd prayed for a relative suffering from cancer and done all the 'commanding' and what-not and the loved one had died.

I think this kind of teaching and emphasis is dangerous - even in its milder forms, as in the case of South Coast Kevin and his Vineyard church.

I would suggest that it's based on a faulty and over-egged reading of the way Jesus prayed and the disciples operated.

Sure, there are rather 'commanding' prayers recorded in Acts and the Gospels but we need to look at the context and also at the theological import of what was happening. I'm not saying that these healings didn't happen but they are recorded for a purpose and there's generally a didactic/theological element. They aren't there to suggest that Christ, his disciples and anyone else went around healing everybody in their path.

Christ raised Lazarus, not the entire cemetery.

He healed Peter's mother-in-law not everyone else's mothers-in-law.

Put bluntly, it's poor theology and poor practice.

I'm not singling the Vineyard out for censure here, but I know of an instance where a couple from a Vineyard church went to the house of a friend who'd lost her baby and prayed over the corpse 'commanding' the dead baby to come back to life.

I find it hard to conceive of anything more likely to cause pastoral problems and lead to major upset.

Sure, I believe that God answers prayer, I believe that people can recover in response to prayer ... but as Nicodemia says, I wish people would pray those prayers privately without barging up to people and laying guilt-trips on them.

I'd seriously question your standpoint on this one, South Coast Kevin my estimable friend, very seriously ...
 

---

Posted by Baptist Trainfan (# 15128) on :
 
I agree with all that.

Furthermore, such prayer can become akin to us browbeating or even blackmailing God (i.e. saying, "You have promised in your Word, therefore we command ...").

How DARE we humans do such a thing? It smells of blasphemy.

But - at the other end of the spectrum - there can also be too much pussy-footing around with "If it be thy will" prayers too. Somehow we need to find a balance.
 

---

Posted by Raptor Eye (# 16649) on :
 
No prayer is good if it tries to paint God into a corner, or if it implies that it's God's will for people to suffer in agony from the evils of disease, hunger, etc.

We're only ever given authority by God to serve God, not to make demands of God.

God gives gifts freely, with no requirement for faith other than sufficient faith to pray.
 

---

Posted by AngloCatholicGirl (# 16435) on :
 
It's good to know that other people are uncomfortable with this type of prayer. I had heard of them before but never encounted them directly and I thought maybe my reaction of 'this is terrible' was the result of my being out of my comfort zone.
I have dealt with families (including my own) having to make hard end of treatment decisions and I think this type of prayer is about as unhelpful as it gets and could even cause harm.
 

---

Posted by no prophet (# 15560) on :
 
I think the only reasonable sort of prayer for illness, for impending death, and other trials is 'help me to bear up under this, give me strength to accept what is happening (or what has happened'. The answers to prayer coming mostly from other people and an internal sense of peace. It doesn't get much better than this, and it is absolutely enough.

God seeming to distinctly not having the inclination to affect the physical, biological etc running of the world and universe. I suspect the reason runs in the direction of free will, with free will also referring to natural processes being let operate as they are set up naturally to do so.

God's purpose only to chip away the bits of us that are not fitted to god's purposes, with our health and safety being epiphenomena. Thus, the bad made good, which is really what the crucifixion message is: that god can make good of pretty much anything if we are only willing to do it, and we also must not be passive and merely go along, we must do and act.
 

---

Posted by Lamb Chopped (# 5528) on :
 
But, but... these aren't prayers, are they? If they're addressing demons (or cancer, or death, or what have you), it seems to me that "prayer" is the last thing you'd call it. Who prays to demons?

And if you're not talking to God, well... you're not talking to him, then. You're not praying.

This maybe looks really petty and pedantic, but I think it's important. Because if we take it out of the category of "prayer," we can maybe avoid the automatic aura of holiness that pops up and see more clearly.

What I see (you can argue with me, of course!) is not prayer, but order-giving. And that's damnably presumptuous if you [general you] are not the person who naturally posesses authority over the one you are giving orders to. In the case of demons etc. only God has that authority as he's the creator of everything. And unless he's clearly and unmistakably delegated to you (and the results make it pretty clear he hasn't, in these cases!), we're back to damnable presumption again. Along with a whole lot of pain for the people involved.

I don't see anything at all admirable in usurping God's authority without clear commandment. And with the damage it does, this kind of thing really ticks me off.
 

---

Posted by cliffdweller (# 13338) on :
 
this I think is a very good point...

quote:

---

Originally posted by Lamb Chopped:
But, but... these aren't prayers, are they? If they're addressing demons (or cancer, or death, or what have you), it seems to me that "prayer" is the last thing you'd call it. Who prays to demons?

And if you're not talking to God, well... you're not talking to him, then. You're not praying.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Lamb Chopped:

What I see (you can argue with me, of course!) is not prayer, but order-giving. And that's damnably presumptuous if you [general you] are not the person who naturally posesses authority over the one you are giving orders to. In the case of demons etc. only God has that authority as he's the creator of everything. And unless he's clearly and unmistakably delegated to you (and the results make it pretty clear he hasn't, in these cases!), we're back to damnable presumption again. Along with a whole lot of pain for the people involved.

I don't see anything at all admirable in usurping God's authority without clear commandment. And with the damage it does, this kind of thing really ticks me off.

---

quote:

---

Luke 10:19: I have given you authority to tread on snakes & scorpions & over all the power of the enemy & nothing will hurt you.

---

where Jesus does delegate that authority, at least to the 70. It's no different than coming up against any other systemic evil-- poverty, child abuse, injustice. We dare to do it because Christ has called us and equipped us for the task.

otoh, the rest of your comments I think are spot on. It's the fruit of this that shows it to be a poisonous plant-- the inevitable pain, despair or disbelief when it doesn't pan out, and the underlying prosperity gospel and all the damage that does.
 

---

Posted by PaulBC (# 13712) on :
 
I find these kind of prayers where we the created tell God the Creator what to do.
I understand where this person is at I lost my father to cancer in 1981 and my mother to demetia 5 yeras ago. Would have prayed such a prayer ? No . When Dad died I had a friend ,an RN tell me be realistic about what is happening advice I was thankful for then and again 5 years ago.
Does this mean I don't believe in the miraculous power of God ? By no means it's just that we can not tell God how things should be. He is afterall God and we are not .ACG I hope yopur friends familu has many concerned friend s like yop around them to support them. They are more precious than gold .
 

---

Posted by Lamb Chopped (# 5528) on :
 
I'm not so sure it takes away the odor of blasphemy, at least for me. The person is still attempting to fill Christ's shoes, and the bad result shows it is wiithout his sanction. That's close enough to blasphemy for me!

I agree that there are some to whom Christ does give this authority and responsibility. But I don't think it's to all or even most of us (as Paul says somewhere, "Are all workers of miracles?" A rhetorical question that clearly expects the answer, "No."

IMNSHO anybody who intends to do this kind of thing had better confirm that he or she is gifted for it before inflicting major pain on a family or suffering person. And certainly refrain from excusing any failures by blaming the faithlessness of the sufferers. I know Jesus occasionally ran into cases where lack of faith was a problem, but he already had a well known miracle record a mile long and an ocean deep. I'll accept that excuse for blaming people from a fellow Christian if he or she can honestly claim the same.
 

---

Posted by cliffdweller (# 13338) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Lamb Chopped:

I agree that there are some to whom Christ does give this authority and responsibility. But I don't think it's to all or even most of us (as Paul says somewhere, "Are all workers of miracles?" A rhetorical question that clearly expects the answer, "No."

IMNSHO anybody who intends to do this kind of thing had better confirm that he or she is gifted for it before inflicting major pain on a family or suffering person.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Lamb Chopped:
And certainly refrain from excusing any failures by blaming the faithlessness of the sufferers.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Gextvedde:
“If you have enough faith and pray the right prayers your cancer will be healed”. Oh it hasn’t worked. Now you have cancer and have demonstrated that you don’t have faith enough to be healed. I really find it hard to see why God’s choice to heal or not to heal would be based on anything as faltering as whether we have it in us to believe the right things at the right time. There’s got to be more to God’s decision making process than that surely?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Lyda*Rose:
"I command..."? That seems a bit mixed up. God's in command, surely. This is where people get faith and magic confused. A person who believes s/he uses magic is in charge of its uses. A person who prays for the power of God's intercession leaves God in charge, no matter the outcome.

---

quote:

---

I have seen people healed, I've received healing, there's no doubt in my mind that God can, and does heal. But for his own reasons, not always.

---

I certainly wouldn't deny someones experience of healing and, whilst I've never seen anything like it myself, pray for healing for people regularly. I think that "for his own reasons" is very important. We don't have access to God's reasoning (if I may put it like that) and I dislike, perhaps detest would be more accurate, the idea of demanding healing them blaming the victim when it doesn't transpire. I think we're on the same page here.
 

---

Posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard (# 368) on :
 
Such prayers are a form of atheism - the same way Christianity was in Rome. Of disavowed disbelief. Projection. Self-deceit. And worse of course as they completely, psychotically distort reality.

People who pray that way need deliverance and the rest of us need to be left alone to die of cancer in peace. Not that I am yet.
 

---

Posted by Squibs (# 14408) on :
 
Thanks balaam.
 

---

Posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard (# 368) on :
 
Indeed Squibs, thanks balaam. Although I have never seen anyone healed and never will. I don't have that disposition. Although I see healing in you as I am experiencing it in myself. I have that one

[ 13. April 2013, 10:39: Message edited by: Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard ]
 

---

Posted by Gamaliel (# 812) on :
 
What balaam said. Verily God hath spoken through the mouth of an ass ...



I just hope that various ass-holes (to mix the metaphor and not referring to anyone here) have the wisdom to receive it.
 

---

Posted by cliffdweller (# 13338) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Gamaliel:
What balaam said. Verily God hath spoken through the mouth of an ass ...



I just hope that various ass-holes (to mix the metaphor and not referring to anyone here) have the wisdom to receive it.

---

Agree w/ my witty friend on both counts. Thank you, Balaam.


 

---

Posted by Crazy Cat Lady (# 17616) on :
 
Well i have been described as a 'healer' and that makes me feel quite uncomfortable because I don't think I am.

But I do have an ability to help people who feel emotionally down, to feel alot better, just by sitting and talking. I think i can do this not via any miracle, but simply because I have had alot of experience of feeling down and I know what helps.

The fact that I can use this experience to benefit others and always seem to know when someone needs a chat even if I haven't spoken to them for a while - now that might be divine.

I do try and avoid butting into people's lives - the 'over eager helper' is just an annoying as those who are indifferent.
 

---

Posted by the giant cheeseburger (# 10942) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Gextvedde:
Posted by balaam

quote:

---

I have seen people healed, I've received healing, there's no doubt in my mind that God can, and does heal. But for his own reasons, not always.

---

I certainly wouldn't deny someones experience of healing and, whilst I've never seen anything like it myself, pray for healing for people regularly. I think that "for his own reasons" is very important. We don't have access to God's reasoning (if I may put it like that) and I dislike, perhaps detest would be more accurate, the idea of demanding healing them blaming the victim when it doesn't transpire. I think we're on the same page here.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Crazy Cat Lady:
Well i have been described as a 'healer' and that makes me feel quite uncomfortable because I don't think I am.

But I do have an ability to help people who feel emotionally down, to feel alot better, just by sitting and talking. I think i can do this not via any miracle, but simply because I have had alot of experience of feeling down and I know what helps.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Spiffy:
I am very familiar with the type of prayer in the OP from my time in a "Name it and Claim it" prosperity gospel church.

The same form of prayer was used on Sunday mornings to pray for, a small selection from my memory:
1) the return of a runaway child
2) recovery from drug addiction
3) money to appear in a bank account (no words on how it would get there)
4) cheating spouses to become faithful
5) the assistant pastor to get a new BMW Z class
6) my 'recovery' from a 'rebellious spirit'.

In my opinion (which is part of why number 6 got prayed) this isn't prayer. It's wishing.

Of course, those who have grown up in such a tradition don't really see it that way, they see it as helping. And then if it doesn't work-- well, there's the fallback explanations that Gextvedde cite-- which turn it into "name it and blame it".

I don't discount the faith of people who have raised in these traditions. I just, you know, sometimes wish they'd shut up.

I'm sure they feel the same way about me, though, when I'm all, "Let's open the Book of Common Prayer to page 827."

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Gamaliel:
I think this kind of teaching and emphasis is dangerous - even in its milder forms, as in the case of South Coast Kevin and his Vineyard church.

I would suggest that it's based on a faulty and over-egged reading of the way Jesus prayed and the disciples operated.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by tclune:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Gamaliel:
I think this kind of teaching and emphasis is dangerous - even in its milder forms, as in the case of South Coast Kevin and his Vineyard church.

I would suggest that it's based on a faulty and over-egged reading of the way Jesus prayed and the disciples operated.

---

This strikes me as explicitly false. The Gospels are very clear on prayer, including healing prayer, as the kind of thing that we are commanded to do. I admit to finding this a rather challenging command, but the notion that somehow it really isn't part of Christ's commision to us seems more wishful thinking that honest exegesis.

--Tom Clune

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard:

Until all the miracles that we dutifully, powerfully, formally, atheistically pray for happen - which they DON'T, not in my narrative, even if I were there with you for whom it does while it did for you and didn't for me - what do we do? For the sick? The afflicted? The poor?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by cliffdweller:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard:

Until all the miracles that we dutifully, powerfully, formally, atheistically pray for happen - which they DON'T, not in my narrative, even if I were there with you for whom it does while it did for you and didn't for me - what do we do? For the sick? The afflicted? The poor?

---

We pray.

We pray for healing. We pray for wisdom. We pray for discernment. We pray for comfort. We pray for understanding. We pray for compassion. We pray for forgiveness when our fumbling attempts to help do more harm than good. We pray for the presence of Christ to be in and with us in our suffering. We pray for healing, in every sense in which that is true.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by tclune:

quote:

---

Originally posted by cliffdweller:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard:

Until all the miracles that we dutifully, powerfully, formally, atheistically pray for happen - which they DON'T, not in my narrative, even if I were there with you for whom it does while it did for you and didn't for me - what do we do? For the sick? The afflicted? The poor?

---

We pray.

We pray for healing. We pray for wisdom. We pray for discernment. We pray for comfort. We pray for understanding. We pray for compassion. We pray for forgiveness when our fumbling attempts to help do more harm than good. We pray for the presence of Christ to be in and with us in our suffering. We pray for healing, in every sense in which that is true.

---

And we pray for universal healthcare...

--Tom Clune

---

And then we do stuff.

We feed the hungry, invite strangers in, give clothes to those that need them, look after the sick and visit those in prison.

Prayer is vital, but it does not exist in a vacuum.
 

---

Posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard (# 368) on :
 
Amen balaam. HOW? When? How much? I'm sick of church. Of church services where I'm asked to worship with money. Of a concert of me, me, me hymns to dying, dying, dying for me, me, me Jesus interrupted by a lecture on doing more, more, more. Where do they fit in to DOING something?

Don't worry, that's rhetorical

No one here has the answers, can show the way. That IS the answer as it is to the OP.
 

---

Posted by Gamaliel (# 812) on :
 
tclune - either I didn't express myself clearly enough or you've misunderstood what I said.

I will go with the former as I'm a charitable soul and of a sunny disposition ...

I didn't say it was wrong to pray for healing.

The practice I was criticising was the 'commanding' prayer malarkey - and I gave examples as to why I thought it was iffy and to be avoided.

I certainly did not say that we shouldn't pray for healing.

What I was concerned about was the WAY that we pray for healing because the commanding kind of way strikes me as pastorally insensitive at best and dangerous at worst.

It's not just a question of saying, 'Well, Jesus and the early disciples did it so it must be ok ...'

What I was suggesting was that we look at the theological lessons that these instances are there in the Gospels to teach us.

'Who is he that the winds and waves obey him?'

The story of Jesus walking on water is there to tell us that he's pretty special. He's doing something that the rest of us can't do. Heck, for a short time even Peter is able to do it too ...

It's telling us that Jesus is divine and that we can share in that to some extent ... but it isn't there to tell us that we can go out for a jog along the lake.



I'm really very sorry to clash with South Coast Kevin on this because he's an all-round good bloke. One of the nicest and most harmless guys on the Ship in my opinion.

But I'm sorry, I must disagree with him on this one.

None of you - besides Baptist Trainfan - have engaged with the instance I gave from an incident I'm aware of. Someone taking it upon themselves to go and pray over the corpse of a dead baby and 'command' that it return to life in the name of Jesus.

Fortunately, in this instance, the parents were pretty cool about it (or as cool as anyone could be in such circumstances) and there was no harm done. But it could easily have had a far more upsetting outcome.

I've seen someone hauled out of their wheelchair and pushed/man-handled around an auditorium with people bellowing and naming-and-claiming and giving it large in tongues and all the rest of it - only for them to slump back into their wheelchair once everyone had worn themselves out ...

It wasn't pretty. It wasn't edifying. It was awful. Probably among the worst things I've seen.

I know what South Coast Kevin is proposing isn't as full-on and wrong-headed as this. Nowhere near. But it's at the milder end of a continuum that leads in that direction.

Sure, there's an equal and opposite error of not actually praying at all ...

But there is a balance.

But I'm afraid I've seen too much huffing and puffing and 'I'll blow your house down' with very little to show for it to want to join Kevin and his pals in praying this way to want to engage in anything like this ever again.
 

---

Posted by Truman White (# 17290) on :
 
Answer to the o/p - "Yes, when these prayers are answered." Need to be careful not to confuse style with substance. Someone who tries to drag someone out of a wheelchair isn't an idiot because he's "commanding prayer" - he's just an idiot.

There's all kinds of different ways to pray in the NT - commanding prayer is one of them.
 

---

Posted by Raptor Eye (# 16649) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by South Coast Kevin:
Thank you, tclune and cliffdweller. I was feeling a bit lonely with my opinion on this, and (I confess) had been rather scared away from contributing to this thread any more, in the face of everyone decrying the 'commanding' prayer approach.

I'm certainly conscious of the dangers that folks have expressed upthread. Yes, there can be an implication that someone involved (the pray-er or the afflicted person) lacks faith if healing doesn't happen. Yes, it can become a form of bossing God around.

But I just can't get away from what I read in the New Testament - it's full of command-type prayers and completely lacking (I think...) in prayers along the lines of 'Lord, please heal this person'. If we're going to pray for healing at all, then I want a very clear reason for not doing it in the way commanded by Jesus and evidenced in the rest of the New Testament.

---

While I agree that we want to follow the example of Jesus, we must remember that everything he did was to show us God.

Unless we're specifically given a gift from God and the authority to use it - and the disciples were given authority (Luke 9:1) - it may not only be against the will of God but dangerous to try to assume authority for ourselves (as in Acts 13-16).
 

---

Posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard (# 368) on :
 
Gamaliel, as always (who'd have thought it eh?).

Truman White. How would we know?
 

---

Posted by Truman White (# 17290) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard:
Gamaliel, as always (who'd have thought it eh?).

Truman White. How would we know?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by tclune:
And we pray for universal healthcare...

--Tom Clune

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Baptist Trainfan:
In this scenario, one doesn't get cancer because of some medical mutation, it is due to your body having been invaded by a "spirit of cancer" which needs to be "rebuked" in the name of Jesus. And you don't become addicted to smoking or alcohol simply because of the nicotine or alcohol: there is a "spirit of smoking/drinking" which has taken you over and needs to be "dethroned".

To me this reeks of superstition and an unBiblical dualism. Have others (perhaps Gamaliel or SCK) come across this? What do they think?

---

I've come across this type of thing and I think it's stupid, unbiblical, dualistic whackadoo.

Not every Christian who believes in healing, and the power of prayer, subscribes to this deeply flawed kind of thinking.

Funnily enough, I am due to preach at a healing service very soon. (I'm Anglican.)

Healing is not an easy issue. I believe that it's always right to request it. I also believe prayer has power. I believe that in Christ we are given authority over the powers of darkness ... and that is a great and powerful thing the church in the West should take a bit more seriously, IMO. Without getting all whackadoo, showing off or shouting at occult forces or whatever as if they were deaf.

Joni Eareckson Tada is excellent on the subject of healing. The woman has been a quadriplegic since 1967: if anyone can write with power and sensitivity on why so many don't get healed, it's most certainly her.

Close friend of mine died tragically last year. I sat by her bed as she was dying. I didn't feel particularly pious while all this was happening, you're in this very intense situation which is just HAPPENING, but I did feel - almost unconsciously - the power and presence of Christ quietly upholding my dying friend, and all those who surrounded her with love and prayer.
 

---

Posted by South Coast Kevin (# 16130) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Baptist Trainfan:
But I wonder if there is another supposed reason for praying in this way, which is the belief that all evil and badness is in some way demonic, and that such prayers are necessary to demonstrate Jesus' authority and victory over these malign powers? I certainly recall this discourse being used back in the 80s. (There was also the belief that the "Marches for Jesus" were really about "repossessing for Jesus" areas which were under the thrall of "territorial spirits")...

To me this reeks of superstition and an unBiblical dualism. Have others (perhaps Gamaliel or SCK) come across this? What do they think?

---

How odd. I replied to this a while ago but obviously something went awry. Probably my fault, oops... To repeat myself then ( ) - yes, I have come across this idea and I've got some sympathy as it starts from a position of taking the New Testament accounts seriously.

I certainly wouldn't blame everything bad that happens on the work of the devil - often, it's just that bad stuff happens - but maybe there's a spiritual force behind more things than we realise.

Someone I know takes the approach when praying with someone of firstly saying in a really quiet and calm way that if there is anything demonic going on then he commands it to go. Something like 'You have no right to be here as we belong to Jesus and he has defeated you'. It's low-key, which I like a lot (hype is not nice), but it does acknowledge the reality (as I see it) of spiritual forces.
 

---

Posted by Gamaliel (# 812) on :
 
I'm sorry Kev, but you sound as if you want to have your cake and eat it. What's the difference between this bloke 'asking' in a calm and quiet way whether there's anything 'demonic' going on and the kind of 'Lord, if it be thy will ...'type prayers that you've already objected to?

If you were going to be really 'New Testament' about it, you wouldn't have to 'ask'. Jesus and the disciples seemed able to tell when there was something demonic going on without asking questions about it ... although you do have the 'What is your name?' 'My name is Legion for we are many ...' thing.

Who is he asking by the way? Is this guy having a conversation with the Devil or what?

You see, this is where it all gets tricky and where I'd suggest that you're barking up the wrong tree by using the NT as a model for practice without putting it into an overall theological and literary context.

It strikes me that there are two equal and opposite errors here.

The first is to treat these NT accounts as purely literary and theological - symbolic, allegorical etc etc - without any present day application in terms of praxis ... and the second is to overlook the literary and theological elements that are clearly there in the text and treat it as some kind of 'Scouting for Boys' manual or casting-out-demons recipe book ...

'First ask your demon its name ...'

The thing is, if we do take these things literally then the devil is a liar and the father of lies so why should we believe anything that's said in that kind of context?

It's not as if any 'demons' are going to tell you the truth is it? Although the the slave-girl who practiced divination and who followed the Apostle Paul around in Acts 16:17 seems to have been pretty much on the money, 'These men are servants of the most high God ...'

I've often wondered why the Apostle left it so long before casting the demon out in this instance ... but that's another piece of speculation.

Now, don't get me wrong, I do think there's a place for some of these things, but I'm reminded of a disclaimer that there used to be on the boxes of Captain Scarlet jig-saws and other toys when I was a kid (remember him? 'Captain Scarlet, Indestructible ...').

It ran something like this:

'Captain Scarlet is indestructible. You are not. Do not try to imitate him.'

Obviously they were expecting law-suits from the parents of kids who jumped off high buildings or whatever in a bid to emulate their hero ...

I'm not saying that none of us should engage with this stuff ... praying for the sick, casting out demons (however and whatever we understand that to be) adn so on ... I'm simply suggesting that we shouldn't do so unless we know what we're doing.

I've yet to see a great deal of evidence within the charismatic movement and across the more avowedly charismatic churches that it does know what it's doing ...

Quite the opposite in fact.
 

---

Posted by Baptist Trainfan (# 15128) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by South Coast Kevin:
How odd. I replied to this a while ago but obviously something went awry. Probably my fault, oops...

---

No, probably mine as I didn't read back everything.
 

---

Posted by South Coast Kevin (# 16130) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Gamaliel:
I'm sorry Kev, but you sound as if you want to have your cake and eat it. What's the difference between this bloke 'asking' in a calm and quiet way whether there's anything 'demonic' going on and the kind of 'Lord, if it be thy will ...'type prayers that you've already objected to?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Gamaliel:
I'd suggest that you're barking up the wrong tree by using the NT as a model for practice without putting it into an overall theological and literary context... I've yet to see a great deal of evidence within the charismatic movement and across the more avowedly charismatic churches that it does know what it's doing

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Gamaliel:
If you want some proper theology on this sort of thing read Nigel Wright the Baptist's 'A Theology of the Darkside.'

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Gamaliel:
I've often wondered why the Apostle left it so long before casting the demon out in this instance ... but that's another piece of speculation.

---

I normally find your posts thoughtful and uplifting, but this one has reminded me of my own worldliness. Is it really only me, who thinks that Paul recognised the benefit of free advertising? I just assumed he was a smart cookie, and appreciated the testimonial of a woman who was considered someone to be listened to. And when I read that he eventually silenced her by exorcism, I thought I’d probably get sick of it after a while, too. There might indeed have been a deeper, spiritual reason for his actions, and perhaps I find it rather too easy to assume others are as basic as I am.

What has puzzled me about that account in Acts I6, is that she earned a great deal of money for her masters, by fortune-telling. Normally, people are only willing to pay for accurate, short-term info: they don’t want to know when the pogo-stick will be invented – they want to know what’ll win the 2.30 at Newmarket. So, was the demon able – by some process – to furnish her with such information? If so, how would it know the future? Or did it, perhaps, just enable her to do slick cold-readings, and waffle-on in a plausible manner?

Going back to the main thrust of the thread, I have every reason to believe that God still heals….sometimes. I personally have no reason to believe that those who habitually command sickness to leave (at least, those that I have seen) have the empowerment or the authority to back-up their words. But others may have had different experiences.
 

---

Posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard (# 368) on :
 
They don't know what hasn't happened - any more than God does. But they can know what HAS happened. What's been said. What's been hidden.
 

---

Posted by Gamaliel (# 812) on :
 
@The Rhythm Methodist ...

No, you've not spoiled this thread, IMHO you've enhanced and added to it. You've hit the nail on the head in that IF 'commands' of this kind were meant to be de-riguer then surely we'd expect to see similar results?

I've heard plenty of claims but seen no actual instances that back up this practice. None whatsoever.

When was the last time any of us saw a blind-person seeing, a lame person walking or any of the other 'big' miracles and healings we read about in Acts?

It may, or may not, help you to hear that if you're 'worldly' then so am I. I've had exactly the same kind of thoughts as you have on this incident with Paul and the slave-girl.

Of course, we're not told all the detail, which is why it's always tricky to use incidents from Acts as some kind of blue-print to follow. I'm sure that Paul will have had his reasons and that these may be very different from anything we might come up with.

I suspect that this kind of fortune-telling/proclamation type of thing was pretty common in those days so he probably shrugged it off until such time as it began to grate ...

As for what passed for prophecy and divination in those days ... well, some of the Delphic oracle stuff sounds like cold-reading to me. I'm sure there was autosuggestion and so on going on - Derren Brown type stuff - just as there is in charismatic circles today - and as there clearly is with contemporary mediums and fortune-tellers and so on.

That said, I'm sure there were also instances that were the 'genuine article' too ... as indeed there are on the contemporary charismatic Christian scene - but pretty few and far between as far as I can see.

As ever with this stuff, the rhetoric belies the reality.

Which isn't to say that some of this stuff doesn't happen from time to time.
 

---

Posted by Inanna (# 538) on :
 
Right now, I am doing therapy with a client in his late 50s, who has a whole host of chronic illnesses, as well as struggling with depression. He has told me recently that he feels as though he can't go back to his church, because they believe in God's healing power, and several people have prayed over him in exactly these kind of ways - casting out demons, commanding his illnesses to leave him, etc. etc. He states that while he knows that he is right with God, he is so scared of people judging him, assuming that he has sin in his life which has blocked his healing, and just the worry of disappointing them since he has not been healed. As a result, he is isolated from a significant piece of spiritual and social support that could be tremendously helpful.

I am sure that most of the people praying for him are oblivious to the kind of expectations and pressure, and resulting isolation that my client is experiencing due to their words. But his suffering, by itself, is enough reason for me to be very wary indeed of any kind of 'power' prayer.
 

---

Posted by Gamaliel (# 812) on :
 
Absolutely Inanna - an excellent example. Mercifully, this gentleman has encountered someone like yourself who can point towards 'a more excellent way.'

To be fair, being aware of the Vineyard fellowships here in the UK and the charismatic scene within Anglican and Baptist circles, it's rare that one comes across anything as 'full on' in this respect as can be found in the US - but it can and does happen.

I thought this kind of emphasis had waned over the last decade but it still seems to be around and going strong. Such things tends to be promulgated from platform-speakers and conferences in my experience or from people copying what they see on certain fundie TV channels ...

As you point out, most people who engage in this sort of thing are oblivious to the damage they are likely to cause and also, I would suggest - with all due respect to Kevin - don't generally have a thought-through theological position. At least not in the way that the rest of us might recognise, he said snootily ...

That's not to say that there aren't people in these kind of churches who aren't theologically-literate or interested in theology - there are. But unfortunately, as the gentleman in your instance illustrates, they are often wary to speak out lest they disturb the status quo or fall out with everyone else.

It's hard being the voice of protest (or even commonsense) in a church like that. I was a dissenting voice for years in a fellowship which had imbibed some of these wonky emphases and teachings. Eventually we had no option but to leave.

I'm certainly not suggesting that South Coast Kevin, Truman White nor any of the other posters here who've argued in favour of this kind of practice are on a slippery slope that leads to deepness daftness ... but they are on something of an incline ... and it's not an incline I'd care to follow ...
 

---

Posted by South Coast Kevin (# 16130) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Gamaliel:
As you point out, most people who engage in this sort of thing are oblivious to the damage they are likely to cause and also, I would suggest - with all due respect to Kevin - don't generally have a thought-through theological position. At least not in the way that the rest of us might recognise, he said snootily ...

---

quote:

---

Which isn't to say that some of this stuff doesn't happen from time to time.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Gamaliel:
That doesn't mean that I'm advocating the use of 'commands' of this kind. The more I think about it, the more I'm coming to the view that these things are recorded in that way in the NT for literary and theological effect.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Gamaliel:
Sure, I'm saying that there are both literary AND theological reasons for the way these things are presented in the scriptures.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Gamaliel:
But the theological suppositions behind the whole thing seem somewhat skewed to me. 'Jesus did that therefore I can do the same thing tomorrow in the high street ....'

Ok, so why don't you take a run along the boating lake at the same time or feed a football crowd with one set of bacon butties?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Gamaliel:
I also know of a hospital chaplain who tells a very sad story of a woman from a 'conventional' (not way-out whacky) charismatic church who died confused and with a sense of abandonment because a promised healing did not materialise.

---

How tragic. No-one should have to face their final journey feeling as if God has 'abandoned' them.

I agree a lot with Gamaliel on this.

I think it is right to pray for healing. But if healing doesn't come in a physical way, then a sense of the Lord's peace in the midst of incredibly difficult circumstances is, IMO, every bit as miraculous.
 

---

Posted by Nenya (# 16427) on :
 
There are some very helpful posts on this thread and thanks to everyone who's contributing. I, like many others, have had my times in the past of power prayers (praying them myself and saying loud Amens to those who are doing it). I wouldn't do it now and would feel very uncomfortable with it and with what a friend of mine describes as seeing demons in the cornflakes but it does occur to me that some people feel the need to pray like that and can it therefore be helpful to them? As an example, years ago Mr Nen and I had moved to a new house and the first night found it really difficult to sleep and felt very unsettled. We engaged in a bit of what we would have described as "spiritual warfare" and after that fell asleep fine and had no problems subsequently. Was something cast out or did praying like that just help us? Who knows?

But it can be very upsetting when healing is involved. A lot of it went on when a friend of mine was dying of cancer. It made going to prayer meetings very distressing, but not to go felt as though I was saying I didn't care.

Nen - who doesn't like cornflakes.
 

---

Posted by Gamaliel (# 812) on :
 
Nen, I suspect that praying like that just helped you and gave you a sense of reassurance so that you were then able to fall asleep.

That said, I keep an open mind about those instances where clergy are called in to 'exorcise' buildings and so on ... although there isn't a great deal of scriptural warrant, of course, for going into particular places to bless them or 'cleanse' them from impure or unhelpful forces.

I'm sure some places can have a 'bad atmosphere' and so on, in the same way that the 'genius locii' of some locations seems particularly uplifting or spiritually charged in some way through associations with good and positive stuff that's gone on ... I know people who claim as much for particular monasteries or sites.

That isn't to say that these places are somehow spiritually 'radio-active' either in a benign or a malevolent sense - but certain places do have atmospheres and associations.

But it ain't something I'd be prepared to 'legislate' over or develop a theology around.
 

---

Posted by South Coast Kevin (# 16130) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Gamaliel:
I would contend that to include a 'command' of some kind - however mildly or undemonstratively - introduces an element of a heightened sense of expectation. 'He commanded the sickness to go in the name of Jesus, therefore we must expect that to have happened ...'

---

Yep, good point. So if I were praying with someone and I thought they might not be familiar with this way of praying, then (if I remembered!) I'd briefly explain how I was going to pray. Most people in my church are familiar with the 'command prayer' method so, to be honest, there is a fair chance that I'd forget to explain in situations where it'd be necessary. I may even have done so recently...

quote:

---

Originally posted by Gamaliel:
...we have the indication from the Book of James - which The Rhythm Methodist has cited - which suggests that an expectation that prayers for healing formed a normal part of church life - along with the anointing with oil, a practice which continues in some sacramental as well as charismatic circles.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard:
Whether we are cessationist or not, God the Holy Spirit is.

---

quote:

---

Whether we are cessationist or not, God the Holy Spirit is.

---

A refreshingly un-postmodern degree of certainty there, Martin.

I find a lot of the stuff that goes on Pentecostal/Charismatic circles deeply depressing. Leaving aside 'commanding prayer' and the damage its failure often causes, there is a mountain of garbage which promotes division, and mitigates against spiritual maturity. There are superstitions about everything from glitter to gold fillings, and contrived rituals for locating 'territorial spirits'. There is angel-oil, gemstones from heaven, pictures and impressions. It is truly the triumph of self-indulgence over sprituality.

There is false teaching, false prophecy and a seemingly endless supply of media charlatans - revered by the undiscerning - who specialise in hype, exaggeration, and flat-out lies. If one of these guys told me the time of day, I'd want a second opinion.

Then there is the prosperity scam - the Parasite on the Body of Christ. It bleeds people white, even while it condemns the poor and the sick as faithless.

I truly envy your certainty about cessationism, Martin. Notwithstanding my own experiences of divine intervention, I would take genuine pleasure in becoming a cessationist, and telling all these people they could go to Hell in a handcart...or in whatever form of transport suited them best. The trouble is - try as I might (and I have)- I can't find any tenable scriptural support for cessationism. It doesn't even seem to be hinted at.

I'm quite prepared to believe you know something I don't. If that's the case, I would be exceedingly grateful if you'd share it with me.
 

---

Posted by Gamaliel (# 812) on :
 
I go along with all of that, The Rhythm Methodist.

I think the issue for me, though, isn't so much that there are charlatans and superstition merchants about - you can find those in any form of Christianity that has a 'supernaturalist' dimension rather than a more Deist or non-interventionist approach - which seems to be the default position of many Liberals.

Rather, I think it's that elements of superstition and bad practice filter their way eventually into those sectors of the charismatic scene which would rightly throw up their hands in horror at attempts at deliberate chicanery.

There's a kind of hardening not of the moral arteries so much as a gradual abandonment of the critical faculties.

So, with due respect and apologies to South Coast Kevin, we'll find people trying to sugar the pill or engage in damage limitation by trying to do the same sort of thing - 'command', 'declare', 'proclaim', 'take authority', 'speak into being' and all the rest of it - but in a milder and softer way.

In all genuine sincerity, South Coast Kevin and others like him, believe that they are simply being obedient to a biblical pattern. 'The early disciples commanded demons to leave, sicknesses to be healed etc etc therefore so should we.'

As I've said upthread, I believe that this is a naive and simplistic approach to the passages in question.

It's often disguised, in charismatic circles, by an appeal to the plain meaning of scripture, 'You see, I'm simply taking God at his word ...'

It always used to be said in the charismatic circles I moved in, that if our experience didn't match scripture then it was our experience that had to change ...

Well ... 30 years on, I really don't see anyone who is able to dismiss sickness and disease with a word of 'command'. As for expelling demons, well, that's always going to be a tricky issue and a difficult one to 'prove' either way.

At least with a physical ailment you can get a medical diagnosis. You can't find anyone on the NHS who is going to tell you how many demons are involved - if any - with something or other.

I'll say it again, the onus is on those who adopt this practice and who believe that in so doing they are being obedient to the plain teaching of scripture to prove that what they are saying is the case.

I've seen enough naming-and-claiming and hooting and hollering and declaring this, that and the other to last a life-time.

Even more moderate (on the surface) groups like the Vineyard have painted themselves into a corner on this one.

My guess would be that it'll be a practice they'll abandon or modify in the cold light of day and in the fullness of time.
 

---

Posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard (# 368) on :
 
The Rhythm Methodist and and and even but above all

I too have experienced and am experiencing right now the intervention of God. He is drawing me to Himself as He is drawing you and therefore is drawing us together.

My wife and I differ on this similarly and had a great Saturday morning conversation about it. Our differences are to be enshrined, protected, defended. By the other. Endorsed.

If there were no differences of narrative how could we come together in Christ?

My narrative has NO intervention in the laws of physics, no possession by God, no miracles beyond the greater miracle of Jesus drawing me to Himself with you and my wife and ALL men. I am FREE of miracles and prophecy. So when the acute, really attention grabbing pain in my left hand that started yesterday goes and comes, Inshallah. God is with me with it. That HAS to be sufficient. When the lung cancer comes or whatever. The dementia.

My darling wife KNOWS that God intervened in her circumstances throughout her life. Not in my narrative He didn't. His providence needs no external intervention. I'd love to hear, publically or privately, how God has intervened in your life and thank God for it while not believing a word of it and I'm more than happy to confess His intervention in mine.

As I said, here it is.

Off to walk in the countryside with my aching bones and my beloved. And we nearly always take turns in praying out oud. Powerful indeed. Look forward to hearing from you.

Your brother Martin
 

---

Posted by Alisdair (# 15837) on :
 
I suppose a usable analogy would be to consider a tree which cannot BE a tree unless its roots are embedded into the earth and rock of the ground which feeds it and which enables it to stand and live.

Likewise, I can no more be me and live without God than the tree without the ground of its being.

When it comes to the active daily outworking of that relationship, the place and impact of prayer and God's engagement with us---who knows!? We're all different---praise God---and all must make our own decisions, but certainly, because I see things one way doesn't (and mustn't), to my mind preclude someone else seeing things differently. There seems no reason why we often shouldn't both be 'right', and just as often both miss the point.

God would seem more than 'big' enough to embrace us both, give us life, and be the way for us, and yet we are not, and never will be, the same.
 

---

Posted by The Rhythm Methodist (# 17064) on :
 
Originally posted by Gamaliel:

quote:

---

Rather, I think it's that elements of superstition and bad practice filter their way eventually into those sectors of the charismatic scene which would rightly throw up their hands in horror at attempts at deliberate chicanery.

There's a kind of hardening not of the moral arteries so much as a gradual abandonment of the critical faculties.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard:
@South Coast Kevin. What questions? Why?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard:
As long as, in the prayers, we acknowledge that God does NOT heal by suspending the laws of physics. Which certainly NONE here have ever seen Him do.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Gamaliel:
I'll be blunt about it. It's poor theology... It's a theology (if it can even be graced with that title)... It's poor exegesis and poor theology.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Gamaliel:
@South Coast Kevin, here's a quote from Oliver Cromwell, 'I beseech thee in the bowels of Christ, think it possible that ye might be mistaken ...'

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Gamaliel:
I've heard nothing from you so far that betokens wisdom in this respect and everything that indicates that your well-meaning friends and your good self are following a trajectory that will inevitably lead to pastoral harm, disillusionment and perhaps even tragedy.

...[Y]ou're still left with the potential for major pastoral fall-out. I'd suggest that you've seen it already in the instance you've given with the lady on the leadership team.

Believe you me, you will see a lot more, a lot more if you persist in your delusions... demonstrates hubris, pastoral insensitivity and a myopic and woodenly literal application of practices in the NT...

Stop it now before you do yourselves and other people some real damage.

---

Are you deliberately using strident terms in an effort to shock me into reconsidering my position? See, what I'm picking up from you is that I'm a theological illiterate who is blind to the likely (inevitable, indeed) effects of praying in the way I'm talking about. I reject those accusations; as already noted, I have given some thought to my theological position and to the possible consequences of its outworking.

I know people feel strongly about this and, like I said, I'm very sorry for the hurt that people have suffered due to unmet expectations of healing. ( for Penny S's colleague.) But I think you can avoid inflating expectations while still praying in the command-type way and, conversely, can't the request-type prayers end up inflating expectations in a similar way?

As I think I said upthread (or maybe I just thought it!), the answer to misuse is correct use, not no use. Don't throw the baby out with the bathwater.
 

---

Posted by Gamaliel (# 812) on :
 
@Alisdair, of course I'd pray that way in times of extremity - and I have done so, but not, mercifully, in the instance of a child's sickness ...

And yes, I'd accept that faith/willingness appears to be involved in many of the instances recorded in the Gospels. And I'd agree that there was something very humane and holy going on.

Where I'd be more wary, I suppose, is in trying to replicate/emulate those responses. Jesus knew what he was doing. We don't.

@South Coast Kevin ... yes, I've become increasingly more strident and this has been something of a deliberate tactic - to try to shock you out of what I see as an insidious complacency.

I know you are not theologically illiterate and I know that you are a sensitive and well-meaning individual. As I've said before, you are probably one of the most harmless and most guileless people on the Ship.

Which is one of the reasons why I've become rather more agitated in your case. Because I know you are acting in good faith and good intentions.

I completely agree with Alisdair that there can be an 'arrogance' and an equal and opposite over-reaction in not praying/expecting God to do anything but I'm afraid - with all due respect - that I've come to the conclusion that the kind of 'command' type prayer you're talking about here isn't something that might be ok for some people provided we aren't too strident about it - but is something that is to be avoided.

Please don't misunderstand me. I'm not saying that there isn't scope/room for confident and prevailing prayer ... but that's very different to assuming the ability to 'command' things to happen.

I don't know much about how these things happen in other Christian traditions, but from what little I've heard about healings and so on in RC and Orthodox circles - and they happen occasionally there, it seems, as well as in charismatic evangelical circles - I don't get the impression that there's much 'commanding' and so on going on.

There might be in terms of exorcisms - but that's not an area I know much about nor have any real desire to explore.

But as far as healings and such go, they appear, in RC and Orthodox circles - to be either associated with particularly gifted or godly individuals - monks, nuns, ascetics etc - or with objects such as icons, crucifixes, rosaries etc in a way that might boggle the mind of many Protestants.

They'll cite the example of handkerchiefs and aprons that had come into contact with the Apostle Paul (Acts 19:11). These appear to have been classified as 'special' or 'extraordinary' miracles.

We've even got an instance in Acts of people laying sick people on the street so that even Peter's shadow might fall across them ...

How do we relate that to contemporary practice?

I know I'm probably sounding like a nag, but you're right ... it is an area that arouses strong feelings and particularly when we have first-hand accounts - as we've had here - of what happens when people apply this sort of thing in a willy-nilly fashion.

You may feel outraged by this, as if I'm questioning your faith/abilities/integrity ... but I'm only challenging you because you're a decent bloke and I don't want to see you getting hurt.

If you want to go around commanding healing in the name of Jesus, then that's up to you. But don't say that any of us here didn't warn you when you find yourself with particularly upsetting fall-out of a dire pastoral situation on your hands.

I could patronise you by saying that I'm older, wiser and longer in the tooth - I'm certainly not as nice a guy as you are. But approaching 52 and with 30+ years of charismatic activity behind me, I'm afraid I can't go along with what you're suggesting. I can't go along with it at all.
 

---

Posted by Ray T (# 12499) on :
 
Further to my previous post a young person in our fellowship was diagnosed with a skin melanoma a couple of years ago. Despite treatment it was announced on Sunday that the cancer had metastased to the brain and bones and any care was now paliative.
This is despite many church sessions of "casting out, commanding" what ever you want to call it. I now have seen 4 instances where "power prayer" has not yielded the desired results. As Gamaliel so wisely says "If it does not work why persist in the practise?
I get upset and annoyed with this style of prayer, I'm beginning to wonder why I go to this church.
To those who advocate this style of prayer please, please search you soul and ask yourselves does it really help, have you asked permission of the sick person and their relatives? Me having been the husband of not one but two terminally ill wives and had power prayer carring on around me without consent, I clung to any "straw" that passed.

I am not bitter as life is too short and The Lord sustained me through these crises.

I am married for a third time but if anything happens in the future I certainly will not want "power prayer".
 

---

Posted by Laurelin (# 17211) on :
 
The term 'charismatic' covers a pretty broad church. I believe in renewal in the power of the Holy Spirit. But I can't stand the more flamboyant (and disgustingly rich, to be blunt) Word of Faith crowd like Hinn, etc.

I believe 100% it is always right to pray for healing. But I am pretty much against 'command' prayers, my own experience of such has been pretty negative. Not as practiced on me, but on family and friends. 'Command prayers' do come across to me as both arrogant and manipulative. Sorry.

quote:

---

Originally posted by South Coast Kevin:
The questions that people have been raising on this thread, pretty much. Did we lack faith? Did our departed friend lack faith? Did God plan this? Does God care? Does God want us to suffer?

---

- No, you didn't lack faith.
- Neither did the lady who died.
- Yes, He did. I'm not a Calvinist: I don't believe God micro-manages us to the nth degree and I am fiercely resistant to any notion that God 'sends' horrible things like cancer. Ugh. That to me is to attribute evil things to a good God. But He does allow these things to happen. And that is a difficult issue with God people have been wrestling with for centuries.
- Yes, He does care.
- No, I don't believe He wants us to suffer, even less does He delight in our suffering, but He does allow it. He has allowed countless Christians to die as martyrs, in car crashes, etc.

No death in Christ is a defeat. Let me repeat: no death in Christ is a defeat. And our times are in His hands.


I recommend the book 'A Place of Healing' by Joni Eareckson Tada: she tackles these issues head-on. Joni is in the Reformed camp, but she's a very nice Reformed type. And the woman knows of what she speaks: she's been in a wheelchair for 40 years and would be thrilled if God healed her miraculously. As things stand, I regard her life as a miracle already.
 

---

Posted by Gamaliel (# 812) on :
 
Absolutely, Laurelin.

I also think of my late great-aunt Nell. She died in the 1980s when she was in her mid-60s, I think. She had cerebral palsy and was literally corkscrewed around so that her face was pointing over her back. She was constantly dribbling and spent most of her later life on a couch tended by loving sisters - one of whom - as was often the case back then - had actually foregone marriage and family in order to look after her.

She never went to school but was as bright as a button and had a sharp, dry wit. She was incredibly fond of us kids and would always reach into her purse and give us a tanner when we visited back in the '60s/early 70s. I still treasure the Book of Common Prayer she gave us when we emigrated to Australia as £10-Poms in the early 60s.

I couldn't attend her funeral but the vicar - who used to bring her communion every week - said that he'd learned more from her about faith, fortitude and suffering than anything he'd studied at seminary. My mum's eyes will fill even now as she remembers how all her sisters (she was one of 12 siblings) gathered by her graveside and prayed together in their simple, direct, 'folk-Anglican' type way. She said it was like an electric charge, the mingling of love, faith and grief.

'Our Nellie's coming to you, Mam,' they said as they buried Nell beside her mother.

That's reality. That's faith. That's love and faith and guts.

All this 'commanding' and claiming and demanding and what-have-you is positively obscene in the light of things like that and Ray T's moving story here.

'Commanding' style prayers are arrogant, manipulative and harmful. Unless one is completely convinced that one has the same level of faith, authority and power - and wisdom and compassion - as Christ, the apostles and those Big S and small s S/saints who appear to have been 'gifted' this way then I'd suggest that one has no business whatsoever even presuming that one can do this sort of thing.

I'm really surprised that anyone persists with this stuff, particularly when it causes nothing but harm and upset. The pastoral damage is all around us.

Are you going to pick up the pieces, South Coast Kevin?
 

---

Posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard (# 368) on :
 
That's REAL testimony of REAL, living, undeluded, pure faith that needs no falsification Gamaliel. Thank you.
 

---

Posted by South Coast Kevin (# 16130) on :
 
Thanks everyone for the testimonies and the challenge you're giving me. I'm not sure I can add to what I've already said, but let me just say this. If one accepts (I know some people on this thread don't) that God intervenes in miraculous ways, then I suspect that expectations can be inflated and lack of faith implied by both types of prayer that we've been talking about.

I wonder if people attracted to the commanding prayer approach are more likely to convey and bring about the negative implications we've been discussing. So it's not the approach itself that is at fault, rather that people attracted to this approach are more likely to pray in an insensitive fashion. Hence, our challenge is to learn how to pray commandingly (you know what I mean...) but sensitively.

All I can say from my own experience is that my church friends and acquaintances who do the commanding prayer thing seem to experience the same emotions as anyone else when healing doesn't come. In my own church context I've just not seen all the horrible fall-out that folks have so movingly shared on this thread. Maybe I've missed it and there are loads of people in my church who are full of anger, with their faith in tatters, following the death of our pastor. But that's not what I've seen; instead I've seen people going through the usual range of responses to losing a loved one.
 

---

Posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard (# 368) on :
 
And well done South Coast Kevin. Most measured. I'm all for faithful hopeless commanding prayer and all embracing of the crucifixion.
 

---

Posted by Lyda*Rose (# 4544) on :
 
South Coast Kevin:

quote:

---

In my own church context I've just not seen all the horrible fall-out that folks have so movingly shared on this thread. Maybe I've missed it and there are loads of people in my church who are full of anger, with their faith in tatters, following the death of our pastor. But that's not what I've seen; instead I've seen people going through the usual range of responses to losing a loved one.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard:
And well done South Coast Kevin. Most measured. I'm all for faithful hopeless commanding prayer and all embracing of the crucifixion.

---

Thanks!

quote:

---

Originally posted by Lyda*Rose:
Likely the ones most hurt (and there might be only a few) aren't there anymore.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Gamaliel:
I can see what you're saying South Coast Kevin but I've come to the conclusion that the approach is intrinsically wrong in and of itself.

...You seem almost hell-bent, if I can put it that way, on clinging to a practice that is misguided at best and delusional at worst. Despite what everyone says, because you and your mates are committed to this style/manner of prayer you're going to stick with it regardless.

I'm sorry, but you have yet to supply a contextualised scriptural argument for why we should expect to pray in this particular fashion and see the same results that Christ and his immediate disciples seem to have done.

---

Okay Gamaliel, that's fine. I realise you think I am in error but clearly I don't agree that I'm 'hell-bent... on clinging to a practice that is misguided at best and delusional at worst'. Turning up the rhetoric is not helping me reconsider my position, sorry.

As for the theological justification, this basically rests on a view that we should expect to do the same kinds of things the first disciples did. In this view, the promises Jesus made to his disciples are promises to us as well.

Yes, there is a certain disconnect (you'd call it cognitive dissonance, I'm sure) arising from the undeniable fact that people aren't being healed hither and thither. But it seems I hear about and occasionally see just enough of the (apparently) miraculous to stop me abandoning my current viewpoint. Perhaps that will change, but I doubt if the change will come as a result of accusations like those you're sending my way, Gamaliel.
 

---

Posted by Gamaliel (# 812) on :
 
To be fair, Lyda Rose, to what I've seen of the Vineyard in the UK, I don't think that they would consciously sit in judgement on anyone who didn't see things the same way or who were distressed by the incident with the death of the woman on the leadership team.

But I think you're right that anyone who had misgivings about their particular approach would tend to slip or slink away over time. But the same could be said of any kind of church at whatever end of the spectrum and whatever style of churchmanship.

In some ways, I must admit, the Vineyard and the New Wine end of the Anglican and Baptist charismatic scenes bother me more than some of the more full-on charismatic outfits as there is sufficient 'soundness' and balance there that it can inoculate people against some of the more harmful emphases that would be immediately obvious in a louder and brasher setting.

At least you know what you're up against in the more strident outfits.

It's precisely the milder, more sensitive and reasonable approach demonstrated by many Vineyard and New Wine-y people that makes them more vulnerable, I think.

I'm not sure I'd have said that a few years ago but it's how I see things now.
 

---

Posted by Komensky (# 8675) on :
 
This idea ('power prayer' and the like) is a confusion of several things. Firstly, the idea that faith and prayer are positive 'forces' that can be harnessed and directed by humans (I have often heard talk of 'aiming a beam of prayer' at someone [this was de rigueur at HTB]). SCK has already played his cards that he subscribes to this idea: that is, God has plans for your health (wealth often, but not always, follows) and these can be released to you through the right kind of prayer. If you don't get them, it's because of a prayer 'blockage' usually attributed (as Kevin argues above) to a lack of faith. This is now an orthodox belief amongst charismatics (see Bill Hybels, et al). Pause for a moment: did Jesus lack faith or have some blockage when he prayed in the Garden of Gethsemane? When Jesus tells Simon Peter (Didymus) about what fate awaits him, it's hardly a health and wealth agenda—but rather brutal martyrdom (John 21: 17–19). Run away from this kind of cack theology.

Is anyone aware of a Ph.D. dissertation or other study on the influence of Star Wars on charismatic theology and praxis? It seems an obvious topic.

K.
 

---

Posted by Laurelin (# 17211) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Gamaliel:
In some ways, I must admit, the Vineyard and the New Wine end of the Anglican and Baptist charismatic scenes bother me more than some of the more full-on charismatic outfits as there is sufficient 'soundness' and balance there that it can inoculate people against some of the more harmful emphases that would be immediately obvious in a louder and brasher setting.

At least you know what you're up against in the more strident outfits.

---

Hmm, dunno about this, i.e. that the more reasonable-looking charismatic streams are somehow more insidious than the more outrageous ones. The more strident outfits sucker in a hell of a lot of people, who give them their money in bucket-loads. (And while it's easy to parody HTB and its South Kensington milieu, it's also easy to be an inverted snob about HTB. There is nothing sinful about being posh. )

quote:

---

It's precisely the milder, more sensitive and reasonable approach demonstrated by many Vineyard and New Wine-y people that makes them more vulnerable, I think.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Komensky:
If you don't get them, it's because of a prayer 'blockage' usually attributed (as Kevin argues above) to a lack of faith.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Komensky:
Is anyone aware of a Ph.D. dissertation or other study on the influence of Star Wars on charismatic theology and praxis? It seems an obvious topic.

---

This discussion has actually guided the choice for my next theology course assignment. I've got to write an essay about some aspect of Christian pastoral care and I think I'll take a look at issues around raising expectations and causing hurt / bitterness through prayers for healing.

I guess that means you should PM me with any questions (or any more book recommendations ) as we're not supposed to discuss study assignments on SoF, are we?
 

---

Posted by chris stiles (# 12641) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Komensky:

Is anyone aware of a Ph.D. dissertation or other study on the influence of Star Wars on charismatic theology and praxis? It seems an obvious topic.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by chris stiles:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Komensky:

Is anyone aware of a Ph.D. dissertation or other study on the influence of Star Wars on charismatic theology and praxis? It seems an obvious topic.

---

I think they are parallel each other rather than one being derived from the other.

Charismaticism of the sort you describe owes much to New Thought (filtered through several steps). In many ways, New Thought with it's self help and individualistic emphasis is the natural theology of America - it jibes well with ideas of the good life and the American Dream. So it is not surprising that Star Wars ends up taking a very Deist approach to things

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Gamaliel:
What SCK doesn't appear to appreciate is that he is approaching the scriptures through the lens of this particular 'power encounter' approach and theology. He has become conditioned to reading the Gospels and Acts in that way and so fondly imagines that he and his friends can achieve similar results if only they persist, practice, pray harder and learn how to pray in a commanding way yet without manipulation and suggestibility.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Baptist Trainfan:
[QUOTE] Even more to the point, we tend to think that the miracles in Acts occur in rapid-fire succession when in fact we are dealing with an expanding Church over something like a 20 year period. This makes me think that miracles and "power healings" are recorded because they were exceptional rather than normative.

While I would not deny for a moment that there was often a dynamism about the early Church which we would do well to recapture, I also feel that for much of its time it was doing ordinary churchy things without a great many remarkable things happening.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Baptist Trainfan:
While I would not deny for a moment that there was often a dynamism about the early Church which we would do well to recapture, I also feel that for much of its time it was doing ordinary churchy things without a great many remarkable things happening.

---

Yes, this a point well worth remembering for the likes of me... I wonder if, in the early church times, there were many instances of people praying those 'Be healed' type prayers without any effect. Or did they feel God's prompting to pray just on those few occasions that are documented in the New Testament?

Assuming the healings happened at all, of course (which I do, but I know many don't).
 

---

Posted by Gamaliel (# 812) on :
 
The thing is, South Coast Kevin, whilst we can never know for sure, it seems axiomatic to me now that what Baptist Trainfan has said here holds true - that we're dealing with edited 'highlights' and also instances that are selected/edited in order to make theological points.

You seem to overlook this and treat the scriptures as some kind of how-to healing manual. That's not what they're about. That's not what they are for ...

We have no idea whether anyone other than the people whose prayers and actions ARE recorded for us - Jesus and a handful of apostles/disciples - prayed 'be healed' type prayers or not.

In some ways, it's irrelevant because the instances that are recorded are the only ones we have.

What matters, surely, is whether 'be healed' type prayers are effective now. I would strongly contest that they aren't. Consequently, I would strongly counsel anyone against the practice.

I submit that the scriptures lay open the possibility of people still being healed in response to prayer - and, on the basis of James's epistle - that prayer for healing should take place in a church context.

But it's a big jump from that to making claims that you, me or anyone else can go around 'commanding' things to happen or praying 'power prayers' in the way that these things are popularly understood in the kind of context in which you operate.

As Baptist Trainfan says, the reason these things were recorded in the first place was because they were pretty remarkable and noteworthy. If these things were available on tap and 'the norm' then why haven't we seen them continuing in great volume to this day?

And why aren't the many thousands of charismatic Christians in this country seeing loads more healings, miracles and what have you than those who don't place such a strong emphasis on such things?

Have you noticed how these things are always happening somewhere else? Developing countries usually.

I'm not being awkward or trying to disagree with you for the sake of it but I'm non-plussed as to why you are so apparently wedded to a particular view of this type of prayer when:

- It has been amply demonstrated by contributors here from a range of backgrounds that it is unwise.

- It has been demonstrated time and again by non-cessationist contributors here that the context, theological thrust and yes, literary considerations, make it highly unlikely that these things happened willy-nilly.

It's as if you've become wedded to a particular Vineyard-style approach to the scriptures and are unable to view them through any other lens than that of an imminent expectation of spectacular 'results' in response to a particular kind of 'commanding' prayer.

I really don't get it ...
 

---

Posted by Gamaliel (# 812) on :
 
Ok, let's get all sola-scriptura if you insist, Kevin ...

Can you cite me chapter and verse that suggests that anyone OTHER than Christ, the apostles - Peter and the others among the 12, the apostle Paul and the 70 - went around using 'power prayers' and commanding stuff to happen?

The only instances I can think of that might conceivably fall into this category are Ananias when he prays for Saul/Paul and the unknown chap who was going around healing people in Jesus's name but who wasn't among the apostolic band. We're not told how he did this nor whether he used 'commanding' prayers.

It also strikes me that 'commanding' type prayers have tended to happen in the context of some kind of exorcism ... which I'm sure you'd agree isn't something that any of us should get involved with unless we knew what we were doing.

Why this assumption that we can all go around 'commanding' stuff?

What's the basis of it other than the fond imaginations of Californian evangelists who imbibed various forms of 'New Thought' style thaumaturgy from their American gung-ho milieu?
 

---

Posted by chris stiles (# 12641) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by South Coast Kevin:
I wonder if, in the early church times, there were many instances of people praying those 'Be healed' type prayers without any effect. Or did they feel God's prompting to pray just on those few occasions that are documented in the New Testament?

---

quote:

---

When I and others were subjected to that grandiose pomposity last night, there was absolutely no sense in which it could be perceived as an act of love…not for the hapless cancer victim, who (if this runs true to form) will only be adding shaken faith or a sense of God’s rejection to his ailment.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by The Rhythm Methodist:
We know this because God himself has invalidated it – and them - by refusing to underwrite their commands.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by chris stiles:

quote:

---

Originally posted by South Coast Kevin:
I wonder if, in the early church times, there were many instances of people praying those 'Be healed' type prayers without any effect. Or did they feel God's prompting to pray just on those few occasions that are documented in the New Testament?

---

So . having arrived at the point where you realise that Acts doesn't describe the complete picture .. are you still wanting make Acts the model of your church practise?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Gamaliel:
Can you cite me chapter and verse that suggests that anyone OTHER than Christ, the apostles - Peter and the others among the 12, the apostle Paul and the 70 - went around using 'power prayers' and commanding stuff to happen?

---

quote:

---

Crumbs The Rhythm Methodist - will you let them in your house again? I wouldn't!

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Truman White:

quote:

---

So . having arrived at the point where you realise that Acts doesn't describe the complete picture .. are you still wanting make Acts the model of your church practise?

---

What's the basis of your church practice?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by balaam:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Gamaliel:
Can you cite me chapter and verse that suggests that anyone OTHER than Christ, the apostles - Peter and the others among the 12, the apostle Paul and the 70 - went around using 'power prayers' and commanding stuff to happen?

---

I can't see why you'd have to restrict it unless you are cessationalist (SP?).

You include Paul in your list, someone who was clearly not one of the 12 (or 120) present at pentecost. If God can give Paul this ministry why not others?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by chris stiles:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Truman White:

quote:

---

So . having arrived at the point where you realise that Acts doesn't describe the complete picture .. are you still wanting make Acts the model of your church practise?

---

What's the basis of your church practice?

---

Scripture filtered through tradition/reason as is the case with everyone I assume.

---

Spot on - and absolutely including anyone who doesn't think that the tradition/ reason filters apply to them. Nobody can read Scripture (or anything else) without filtering it.
 

---

Posted by South Coast Kevin (# 16130) on :
 
Thanks for all that, cliffdweller. I'm strongly leaning towards both open theism and the so-called 'warfare worldview', which I think make so much sense when put together. IMO they certainly provide the best explanation for why bad things happen despite God being defined by love.

EDIT - Is there any chance you could post a link for more details of the conference you went to last week? I'd love to find out more and, if possible, listen to some of the talks.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Gamaliel:
When was the last time SCK and his pals saw some powerfully and incontrovertibly healed in response to a 'commanding prayer' of the kind he is advocating here?

I'm not a betting man but I'd put money on it not being very likely. I doubt he's ever seen such a thing. I haven't.

I'm not talking about 'I had a head-ache/cold/migraine/poorly toe last week and after people prayed in the Sunday morning meeting it had got better by Wednesday ...'

No, you know the sort of thing I'm talking about. And you won't have seen it any more than I did in 30 years of knocking around with charismatics.

Sure, some people are apparently healed in response to prayer and for that we give thanks.

But to go around laying claim to the power and authority to do things that don't apparently happen to order nor on cue strikes me as the height of presumption.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by South Coast Kevin:

EDIT - Is there any chance you could post a link for more details of the conference you went to last week? I'd love to find out more and, if possible, listen to some of the talks.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by South Coast Kevin:


As it happens, I just heard this morning of someone who had a pulled muscle in his leg which got better after people prayed with him. I don't think he'd sought medical help but he said it was painful enough to interrupt his sleeping one night last week, then a friend prayed with him the following evening and his leg was fine after that. No pain any more, uninterrupted sleep that night.

I don't expect this story to be solid enough to convince someone sceptical, but it's the kind of thing that's sturdy enough to stave off the cognitive dissonance for me...

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by cliffdweller:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by South Coast Kevin:
[qb]
EDIT - Is there any chance you could post a link for more details of the conference you went to last week? I'd love to find out more and, if possible, listen to some of the talks.
.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Raptor Eye:
Surely if God intended to heal the man's leg as an answer to prayer, he'd have done so regardless of whether the friend prayed with the sufferer as a request or a 'power prayer'.

Yielding to God is what it's about, not taking control.

---

Yeah maybe, but maybe there's something important about us accepting the power and authority that God has given us. And - here's where the warfare worldview comes in - prayer is in the context of a battle with evil spiritual forces so when we pray for healing etc. we're seeking to undo the works of those evil spiritual powers (and also the consequences of humanity's rebellion against God). It's not really about whether God wanted to heal my friend's leg, or about us yielding to God.

Therefore, we shouldn't pray for God to the work of healing, we should take the authority he has already given us and speak directly to the injury, illness or whatever. Like the first Christians apparently did.

Cliffdweller - many thanks! I'll keep an eye out for another post from you (or feel free to PM me ), and also on the website and Greg Boyd's blog too.
 

---

Posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard (# 368) on :
 
I think anadromously I mentioned a week ago that I had a really attention grabbing pain in my left index finger root knuckle. Not a twinge since.

Anybody here pray for me?

I know God's got a funny sense of humour. I have many other joint and ligament pains which continue to collectively distract. I am grateful for His providence.

Does God intend for me to moderate my tone?
 

---

Posted by Baptist Trainfan (# 15128) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by South Coast Kevin:
Prayer is in the context of a battle with evil spiritual forces so when we pray for healing etc. we're seeking to undo the works of those evil spiritual powers (and also the consequences of humanity's rebellion against God).

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Truman White:
@ Chris Stlyes - I'm not having a pop here mate cause I respect where you're coming from. Gotta say I reckon you're being a tad myopic when it comes to the Bethel crowd. Yeah Deadmon's ' my lad walked on water' jars ( no pun intended).

If you want nutty theology how about John Piper's 'everything that happens is down to God's will, including my sin.' Yeah, really he said that. But he's also got stacks of good stuff which gives people solid grounds for their belief. Genius and wackiness often go together - sifting the two is part of growing up.

---

quote:

---

T'other side of coin is that he's inspired thousands of Christians worldwide to get off their backsides and onto to the streets talking to people about Christ,

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by South Coast Kevin:
Yeah maybe, but maybe there's something important about us accepting the power and authority that God has given us. And - here's where the warfare worldview comes in - prayer is in the context of a battle with evil spiritual forces so when we pray for healing etc. we're seeking to undo the works of those evil spiritual powers (and also the consequences of humanity's rebellion against God). It's not really about whether God wanted to heal my friend's leg, or about us yielding to God.

Therefore, we shouldn't pray for God to the work of healing, we should take the authority he has already given us and speak directly to the injury, illness or whatever. Like the first Christians apparently did.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Baptist Trainfan:

quote:

---

Originally posted by South Coast Kevin:
Prayer is in the context of a battle with evil spiritual forces so when we pray for healing etc. we're seeking to undo the works of those evil spiritual powers (and also the consequences of humanity's rebellion against God).

---

Now that opens a huge packet of questions! And I say this as someone who finds it quite acceptable to believe in malevolent spiritual powers (after all, we have no trouble believing in God himself).

For can we really say that illnesses (at least usually) are the work of those evil powers? I think not. And can we really accept that disease came into the world as a direct result of human sin? That to me means taking the story of the Fall far too literally - quite apart from ignoring the science of germs and bacteria etc.

Ultimately this leads us to the "big" question of "where does sickness/suffering/evil come from" which is a big imponderable!

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Truman White:
@Chris. Alright mate? I'm not ' arguing' for anything, just stating some facts. Christianity's a missionary movement - plenty of churches with great theology never make an iota of impact on their communities.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jade Constable:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Baptist Trainfan:

quote:

---

Originally posted by South Coast Kevin:
Prayer is in the context of a battle with evil spiritual forces so when we pray for healing etc. we're seeking to undo the works of those evil spiritual powers (and also the consequences of humanity's rebellion against God).

---

Now that opens a huge packet of questions! And I say this as someone who finds it quite acceptable to believe in malevolent spiritual powers (after all, we have no trouble believing in God himself).

For can we really say that illnesses (at least usually) are the work of those evil powers? I think not. And can we really accept that disease came into the world as a direct result of human sin? That to me means taking the story of the Fall far too literally - quite apart from ignoring the science of germs and bacteria etc.

Ultimately this leads us to the "big" question of "where does sickness/suffering/evil come from" which is a big imponderable!

---

I would agree with this. It's not the casting out evil I take issue with, it's considering a pulled muscle to be demonic in nature. It's....not. It's how our bodies work! Now, I HAVE had an unexplained healing myself (of an eye infection), and I'm a decidedly non-charismatic (but not cessationist) Anglo-Catholic. While I am thankful to God for that healing, I don't see that God exorcised me in any way. Likewise, my mental health problems and other health issues (digestive) are down to chemical imbalances, not a demon lurking in my small intestine.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by cliffdweller:
So, Boyd suggests, we do not pray "if it is your will..." in healing prayer because we know that illness, disease and death is not God's will-- not the way things are meant to be. While we know that many prayers of healing will not be answered (addressing the "why not?" question behind that would require a digression into the specifics of open theism that will make many the classical theologian's heads explode) we know that God wills for all to be healed, and for all death and disease to cease. So when we pray for healing we are partnering with God to expand the work of the Kingdom. We are praying to align ourselves with his work, using the "weapons of the Spirit".

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by chris stiles:

quote:

---

Originally posted by cliffdweller:
So, Boyd suggests, we do not pray "if it is your will..." in healing prayer because we know that illness, disease and death is not God's will-- not the way things are meant to be. While we know that many prayers of healing will not be answered (addressing the "why not?" question behind that would require a digression into the specifics of open theism that will make many the classical theologian's heads explode) we know that God wills for all to be healed, and for all death and disease to cease. So when we pray for healing we are partnering with God to expand the work of the Kingdom. We are praying to align ourselves with his work, using the "weapons of the Spirit".

---

This seems like so many word games to me .. yes, illness and death isn't part of God's original plan, but his 'will' is that they will finally be resolved in the new creation. Of course in some sense the new creation is his ultimate 'will', yet we can also say (looking back at the past) that at some point it wasn't his 'will' 'yet'.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by chris stiles:
[
"If it be your will" isn't so many weasel words - it's literally an act of submission as in "Not my will but yours be done".

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by chris stiles:
[
To that extent it seems like an attempt to immanetize the eschaton (quite literally) - some thing I don't think we have any warrant for. It's not an entirely surprising endpoint to a journey that starts with openness theology though.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by cliffdweller:
Rather, the Fall/corruption of nature begins in the very 2nd nanosecond of creation/the big bang. It is built into the fiber of the world as we now know it. ... So, yes, we are ill and our bodies decay and die for exactly the same reason there are destructive earthquakes and tsunamis and hurricanes-- because that is "the way things are." But "the way things are" is not the way they were meant to be. And it is not the way they will be in the new creation.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by cliffdweller:
Far better to either embrace an integrated classical/Augustinian paradigm OR an integrated openness/ Christus victor worldview than this ill-conceived mutant hybrid, perhaps.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Baptist Trainfan:

quote:

---

Originally posted by cliffdweller:
Rather, the Fall/corruption of nature begins in the very 2nd nanosecond of creation/the big bang. It is built into the fiber of the world as we now know it. ... So, yes, we are ill and our bodies decay and die for exactly the same reason there are destructive earthquakes and tsunamis and hurricanes-- because that is "the way things are." But "the way things are" is not the way they were meant to be. And it is not the way they will be in the new creation.

---

I don't get it. That seems to be saying that God could have made a perfect world and couldn't (or chose not to). Or else that a corrupting influence sneaked in during that very first nanosecond.

I agree that "that's the way things are". I also agree that "that's not how they're supposed to be" and that Jesus "will remake it as it ought to be". But - unless I have misread you - I'm not sure how this cosmology gets from the first state to where we are at the moment.

The Adam and Eve story at least offers an explanation, even if it's not one I "buy" in any literal sense.

---

That was the last question asked at the conference, when everyone was tired and ready to go home, so I'm not sure the answer I heard from Boyd was as detailed as we might like (I'm guessing a more detailed response would be found in
Satan and the Problem of Evil which I haven't had a chance to read yet-- Boyd writes faster than I can read!).

But I think Boyd's answer would again just be the basic foundation of the open position-- that God chose to create an "open" universe-- one in which we (both humans and non-humans, e.g. angels) were free to choose good or evil. Freedom is essential to love-- love is not really love if it is not chosen. Boyd suggests that there is a certain metaphysical balance here-- that the degree to which we are capable of choosing good is limited to the degree to which we are free to choose evil. Once a freedom is given, it cannot be revoked. i.e. if you are free to choose good or evil, then you chose evil and God revokes/ undoes your evil choice, that means you never were free to choose evil-- God would always override that choice. The amount of power/dominion someone or some being is given is the range of their power/ability to do either good or evil (i.e. exceptional humans can do tremendous good-- or tremendous evil). Similarly, for metaphysical reasons, once a territory is given it cannot be revoked. So Lucifer was given dominion over earth pre-fall (Lucifer's fall that is), with the capacity/power to do tremendous good-- but of course, chose evil instead. Now God's task is to "do war" on Satan (which Boyd explains "Akido-like"-- turning the power of evil back on itself) in order to rescue humanity and all of creation from this corrupting power.

The irrevocability of free choices is part of the metaphysical reality of things. In the same way that God cannot make a square circle or a married bachelor, God cannot undo free choices because that would mean they were made out of unfree freedom.

Now my head is hurting.


 

---

Posted by cliffdweller (# 13338) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Baptist Trainfan:

quote:

---

Originally posted by cliffdweller:
Rather, the Fall/corruption of nature begins in the very 2nd nanosecond of creation/the big bang. It is built into the fiber of the world as we now know it. ... So, yes, we are ill and our bodies decay and die for exactly the same reason there are destructive earthquakes and tsunamis and hurricanes-- because that is "the way things are." But "the way things are" is not the way they were meant to be. And it is not the way they will be in the new creation.

---

I don't get it. That seems to be saying that God could have made a perfect world and couldn't (or chose not to). Or else that a corrupting influence sneaked in during that very first nanosecond.

---

So again, just to clarify-- yes, Boyd is suggesting that a corrupting influence-- Satan-- acted during that first nanosecond. "Sneaked in" would not be entirely correct because God is not surprised by our free choices (even tho Piper would like to characterize the open position that way). God foresees all our infinite possible choices and all the subsequent choices/ consequences of those free choices. God has a plan in place (like a super master chess player on steroids) to insure his promised future in any contingency, but cannot foreknow which of those futures will actually unfold because the future choices of free (but contingent) creatures cannot be known, although they can be anticipated. So God anticipated the possibility of Satan's corrupting influence but also foresaw the possibility of a far different future had Satan chosen differently. But in either contingency God has a plan to rescue humanity.

If this is making your head hurt as it is mine, Boyd says that is "why we can't know why". We have finite brains, so are able to comprehend/anticipate a finite number of possible futures. Even a master chess player has a finite number s/he can "see out"-- a finite number of possible moves they can plan ahead for. But God is infinite, and so has an infinite capacity to anticipate our possible free choices and all the interrelated consequences.

Because our free choices are all interrelated in an infinitely complicated web-- e.g. a seemingly insignificant decision on the other side of the world a millennia ago impacting my free choice today, for example-- we can't possibly have the capacity to see how any particular event is related to that integrated interconnected web of free choices/ "natural" consequences of the Fall, etc. We "can't know why" we can only know the character of God, which is always for good, always for love.

Now my head hurts even more!

 

---

Posted by Solly (# 11919) on :
 
I remember reading David Watson's account of his struggle to be healed of cancer. He and his community were profoundly shaken when the expected healing didn't happen. Perhaps Newman's 'Mission' devotion is a better way - 'God knows what he is about'.
 

---

Posted by Laurelin (# 17211) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Solly:
I remember reading David Watson's account of his struggle to be healed of cancer. He and his community were profoundly shaken when the expected healing didn't happen. Perhaps Newman's 'Mission' devotion is a better way - 'God knows what he is about'.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by cliffdweller:
So again, just to clarify-- yes, Boyd is suggesting that a corrupting influence-- Satan-- acted during that first nanosecond.

---

Okay, I get you. I've read 'God at War' but not 'Satan and the Problem of Evil'. It's on the list...

Thinking about it, the Adam and Eve story fits quite well with all this - humanity 'fell' and rebelled against God, in a cosmos where evil already existed. We sometimes forget that the Genesis story has evil (in the form of the snake) already there in the Garden of Eden before the forbidden fruit is eaten.
 

---

Posted by cliffdweller (# 13338) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Laurelin:

I haven't read much about 'open theism' but I am wary of it. While I'm not a fan of Calvinism, and dislike too heavy an emphasis on predeterminism, the idea that a sovereign God doesn't know the future really makes my hackles rise. That, to me, is like us projecting our insecurities onto Him. I think it's presumptuous.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Gamaliel:
For my money, though, the difficulty comes when it's allied with an over-spiritualisation of this issue. Spiritual warfare, in my view, is more about tackling our own weaknesses and inadequacies, about tackling issues of social injustice, on fighting for the rights of the down-trodden and marginalised.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Gamaliel:
The fact that David Watson, as Laurelin states, had a more balanced view is because his roots went back further into the classic tradition.

---

Yep.

quote:

---

Spiritual warfare, in my view, is more about tackling our own weaknesses and inadequacies, about tackling issues of social injustice, on fighting for the rights of the down-trodden and marginalised.

It's got bugger all to do with marching around town and shouting and bawling at so-called 'principalities and powers'.

It's about 'fighting the good fight,' a militancy of approach. The Church Militant.

---

I agree with all of this, but I still do think there is a place for actually commanding the dark powers just to bog off. I mean, Martin Luther did once throw an inkwell at the devil. Yeah, I know Luther had issues. And medieval baggage to boot. Even so, I can't quite discount his experience there. In addition to the principalities and powers that are at work, for example, in an oppressive regime.

I'm a cautious charismatic, a questing one, I suppose. I've certainly seen much silliness in this area, much bad practice and probably a lot that was harmful.

quote:

---

Originally posted by cliffdweller:
Proponents will insist that's not quite what they believe. Open theists believe God knows every possible future as if it were the only future. That God is not at all surprised by anything that comes to pass, he is never taken off guard.

---

Oh, OK. That doesn't sound quite so heretical ...

quote:

---

That being said, it is a radically different paradigm, so some caution is in understandable and prudent.

---

Indeed.

And really ... all this philosophical stuff makes my head hurt.
 

---

Posted by cliffdweller (# 13338) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by chris stiles:

Firstly, I'm not sure why it then makes 'power prayers' more acceptable - though cliffdweller presumably felt it should. I'm also not sure how it works pastorally when prayer 'fails' (it seems to leave a weight of a counter possibility on the person praying whose prayer 'failed') - do we just encourage people to continue praying in the hope of an ever more unlikely alternate future?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by cliffdweller:
otoh, I think there is something of comfort to the ailing/grieving person we're praying for, when we join with them in saying "this is just evil" and affirming their instinct that something is seriously f****d up with the world where this sort of thing (childhood cancer, say) happens.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by cliffdweller:
Not following your assumptions here?

I also think the more radical warfare/open theist paradigm gives an arguably more satisfying framework to understand non-healing.

---

quote:

---

The real problem, as I said before, is the weird hybrid of the two that tries to mesh warfare theology with Calvinist sovereignty, leading to the very bad fruit we've talked about here.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by chris stiles:

quote:

---

Originally posted by cliffdweller:
Not following your assumptions here?

I also think the more radical warfare/open theist paradigm gives an arguably more satisfying framework to understand non-healing.

---

What's the answer it gives? AFAICT it basically consists of a mix of God couldn't, versus God possibly could if only you had known how to work better with him to bring about the more realized state in which you would have been healed.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by chris stiles:

quote:

---

Originally posted by cliffdweller:
The real problem, as I said before, is the weird hybrid of the two that tries to mesh warfare theology with Calvinist sovereignty, leading to the very bad fruit we've talked about here.

---

I think 'power prayers' and 'calvinist theology' are orthogonal to each other, I don't see how the topic of the OP merges in reformed theology in any particular way. [/QB]

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Gamaliel:

I've seen a similar development within the Baptists in the UK. Contemplative prayer, pilgrimage and retreats and so on are de-rigeur in some Baptist circles these days.

Bring it on, I say, there's a lot of fruitful interaction.

I think you're right about the dangers of creating hybrids though ... although one could argue that the Anglican communion is a hybrid as it tries to meld the Catholic with the Reformed (or reformed).

I think there can be a creative tension from such initiatives and experiments.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Gamaliel:
Absolutely, Chris ... the thing is, though, pragmatism seems to win every time in some of these churches - despite the collateral damage.

@South Coast Kevin - it could well be that your friend's pulled muscle was healed in answer to prayer, it could just have easily happened naturally. I have a Christian friend who is a physiotherapist. Speak to her about this sort of thing. With orthopaedic and other musculo-skeletal conditions apparently spontaneous remission happens all the time ... whether or not there's faith or prayer involved.

@Truman White, there's more to theology than Piper on the one hand and the Bethel types on the other. To consider just these is to use an exceptionally narrow frame of reference.

Lots of churches - of all theologies - do good stuff in the community. Some do good stuff in other ways. How would we go about assessing the 'impact' as it were of a convent of nuns or a monastery somewhere?

Are these invalid because they're not out on the streets button-holing people for Jesus?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by cliffdweller:
If you think the latter ("if only you...") is even a possibility in the warfare/open theist paradigm then you have just NOT been paying attention at all.

---

quote:

---

And yet, that weird hybrid is precisely what you see in most of the Pentecostal churches practicing the sort of "power prayers" we're talking about.

---

quote:

---

God foresees all our infinite possible choices and all the subsequent choices/ consequences of those free choices. God has a plan in place (like a super master chess player on steroids) to insure his promised future in any contingency, but cannot foreknow which of those futures will actually unfold because the future choices of free (but contingent) creatures cannot be known, although they can be anticipated.

---

I'm not quite sure why future choices of free (but contingent) creatures cannot be known by God. Would it somehow make them less free, if he knew in advance what those choices would be? I don't think so....any more than I think the fact that my wife always knows exactly what I'll pick from a menu, interferes with my freedom to choose.

Anyhow - 'spiritual warfare': For the most part, it seems to consist of wannabe dragon-slayers tilting at windmills. For instance, there is an intricate mythology built up around territorial spirits - loosely based on a fanciful extrapolation from a couple of lines in Daniel. Then there is the deliverance industry, spiritual-mappers, people casting demons out of the local Freemason's lodge, the chip-shop, the toilet-bowl....and even the church. There is the cacaphony of rebukes, authority-taking and "loooose him and let him go". And what does it ever achieve?

Nothing....unless you count the warm, self-satisfied glow of the 'spiritual warriors'. Nothing....unless you count destroyed faith, disappontment, division in the church, and the endemic spiritual immaturity which so often accompanies these superstitions.

And superstitions they most certainly are. They are attempts to influence the spiritual realm, by the employment of extra-scriptural rituals.Superstitions.

The truth is, the bible doesn't begin to justify any of this nonsense. It's made-up stuff. What, for example, can we actually deduce from that snippet about the Prince of Persia? We can deduce that there once was such a being who apparently had a specific sphere of influence. Even some angels were afraid to deal with this entity. What does the mythology say? There are various ranks of demonic creatures who are regional or local reps for the devil. They are virtually everywhere, and our job is to seek them out and employ a contrived ritual to remove them. We are to assume God wants us to do that, because that's part of our spritual warfare, isn't it?

We have to deal with the principalities and powers. Really? Take a look at Ephesians 6. That tells us what we actually need to do. It tells that we have (in effect)to clothe ourselves with Christ and stand firm.It doesn't sanction offensive action - least of all of the kind favoured by spiritual warriors.

How about 2 Corinthians 10? That mentions demolishing strongholds, and is much-quoted by those of the warfare mindset. But here it is, from the NIV:"For though we live in the world, we do not wage war as the world does. The weapons we fight with are not the weapons of the world. On the contrary, they have divine power to demolish strongholds. We demolish arguments and every pretension that sets itself up against the knowledge of God, and we take captive every thought to make it obedient to Christ".

"We do not wage war as the world does". It isn't about confrontation or struggle. Our weapons have divine power to demolish strongholds. What do we demolish? Arguments and pretension.

Then we have deliverance ministry for Christians. Let's leave aside the fact that this is so often an inneffective substitute for repentance. Let's forget that - apparently - Jesus allowed many generations of Christians to struggle and fail, before finally letting them know (through some dubious teachers in the 20th century) that this problem existed. And let's overlook the fact that scripture never even hints at the need for Christian deliverance, which - if true - would be profoundly important.

But let's do it anyway. Let's speak into the lives of the vulnerable, let's cast things out of them...let's convince ourselves we are 'players' on the spiritual stage, at whatever cost to those we are claiming to help.

No-one could read the bible and come to the conclusion that any of these activities have a scriptural mandate. In general terms, spiritual warfare, as it is commonly understood, is nothing more nor less than a collection of superstitious rituals. At its best, it is man's attempt to make himself usuful to God, albeit in ways he has never required. At its worst, it is deeply damaging to individuals and churches alike.
 

---

Posted by Gamaliel (# 812) on :
 
@ Truman White. Thanks. Good post.

As this is the Magazine of Christian Unrest it's inevitable that the slant is going to be a tad critical or even negative at times ... it's what it says on the tin.

But sure, you're right, all these groups do good stuff in their own various ways.

I know you're not saying that we shouldn't challenge poor theology or practice. It might not sound like it at times, but I am trying to do so constructively here. I like South Coast Kevin. I think he's a good bloke. I don't want to see him hurt by any of this stuff. But then, he's an adult, he can make his own choices.


 

---

Posted by South Coast Kevin (# 16130) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Gamaliel:
I like South Coast Kevin. I think he's a good bloke. I don't want to see him hurt by any of this stuff. But then, he's an adult, he can make his own choices.

---

On the one hand, thanks for your concern.

On the other, please would you stop treating those who hold views you disagree with as spiritual children who'd really benefit from a good bit of mentoring from wise Gamaliel? Deal with it; some people have read the same Bible as you, and even had some of the same experiences as you, but nonetheless come to very different theological conclusions. It doesn't mean we're spiritually immature and will come round to your view once we've been around the block a couple of times.
 

---

Posted by Gamaliel (# 812) on :
 
Wait and see ...

Seriously, would you rather I didn't shout a warning if you were about to be run over by a lorry?

Even more seriously, Gamaliel isn't wise, Gamaliel isn't mature and if anything he's been pretty daft for hanging on longer than was good for him in places that go in for the kind of 'command and control' bollocks that we've been discussing here.

Cliffdweller's talking theology, Chris Stiles is talking theology. You aren't. I wouldn't even grace Vineyard teaching with the title.
 

---

Posted by cliffdweller (# 13338) on :
 
sigh.

quote:

---

Originally posted by chris stiles:

quote:

---

Originally posted by cliffdweller:
If you think the latter ("if only you...") is even a possibility in the warfare/open theist paradigm then you have just NOT been paying attention at all.

---

Well, I've read a bit around the subject - so have been paying some attention. When one starts to talk about 'partnering with God to expand the work of the Kingdom', the possibility exists that the possible futures in which one wasn't healed was 'chosen' because of our actions.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by chris stiles:

quote:

---

Originally posted by cliffdweller:

And yet, that weird hybrid is precisely what you see in most of the Pentecostal churches practicing the sort of "power prayers" we're talking about.

---

This is only true of you define everything other than 'open theology' as some form of Reformed theology.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by chris stiles:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by cliffdweller:
[qb] As I said, I think the roots of power prayers lie elsewhere - one can see similar things in contemporary culture, but if you want to treat everything as a nail I suggest you start another thread on open theology.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by The Rhythm Methodist:
Originally posted by cliffdweller:

quote:

---

God foresees all our infinite possible choices and all the subsequent choices/ consequences of those free choices. God has a plan in place (like a super master chess player on steroids) to insure his promised future in any contingency, but cannot foreknow which of those futures will actually unfold because the future choices of free (but contingent) creatures cannot be known, although they can be anticipated.

---

I'm not quite sure why future choices of free (but contingent) creatures cannot be known by God. Would it somehow make them less free, if he knew in advance what those choices would be? I don't think so....any more than I think the fact that my wife always knows exactly what I'll pick from a menu, interferes with my freedom to choose.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by The Rhythm Methodist:

Anyhow - 'spiritual warfare': For the most part, it seems to consist of wannabe dragon-slayers tilting at windmills. For instance, there is an intricate mythology built up around territorial spirits - loosely based on a fanciful extrapolation from a couple of lines in Daniel. Then there is the deliverance industry, spiritual-mappers, people casting demons out of the local Freemason's lodge, the chip-shop, the toilet-bowl....and even the church. There is the cacaphony of rebukes, authority-taking and "loooose him and let him go". And what does it ever achieve?

Nothing....unless you count the warm, self-satisfied glow of the 'spiritual warriors'. Nothing....unless you count destroyed faith, disappontment, division in the church, and the endemic spiritual immaturity which so often accompanies these superstitions.

And superstitions they most certainly are. They are attempts to influence the spiritual realm, by the employment of extra-scriptural rituals.Superstitions.

The truth is, the bible doesn't begin to justify any of this nonsense. It's made-up stuff.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Gamaliel:
Seriously, would you rather I didn't shout a warning if you were about to be run over by a lorry?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Gamaliel:
Cliffdweller's talking theology, Chris Stiles is talking theology. You aren't. I wouldn't even grace Vineyard teaching with the title.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by cliffdweller:
No, I'm not saying anything like that. I was speaking specifically about the hybrid of Calvinism and warfare theology I've seen in American Pentecostal churches I've been a part of, and contrasting that with the Open/warfare theology I saw at the conference, that's the relevant distinction. It's not the only two options in the world, rather it happens to be the two particular options I was discussing at that particular time.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by chris stiles:

quote:

---

Originally posted by cliffdweller:
No, I'm not saying anything like that. I was speaking specifically about the hybrid of Calvinism and warfare theology I've seen in American Pentecostal churches I've been a part of, and contrasting that with the Open/warfare theology I saw at the conference, that's the relevant distinction. It's not the only two options in the world, rather it happens to be the two particular options I was discussing at that particular time.

---

That's fair enough - but contra your personal experience the majority of churches in which 'power prayers' are practised are far from 'Calvinist' in any sense. I don't think the OP context was the same as yours.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by cliffdweller:
I don't believe that's true, at least in the US. I've got pretty strong connections in the wider Pentecostal community here, as well as with some of the major movers/shakers in the spiritual warfare movement.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by chris stiles:

quote:

---

Originally posted by cliffdweller:
I don't believe that's true, at least in the US. I've got pretty strong connections in the wider Pentecostal community here, as well as with some of the major movers/shakers in the spiritual warfare movement.

---

In that case, name the movements and describe the issues you see. Going back to the OP - the problems described were in a non 'calvinist' context - so if they are the same issues you see then 'calvinism' itself may have little connection with the problems caused.

[At the moment, and given the tangent - you sound seriously like a convert to something who is blaming the ills of the world on the movement you left]

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Gamaliel:
Ok, fair call, South Coast Kevin. I'd been flitting between Purgatory and Hell when I posted that and hadn't quite settled back into Purgatorial mode.

---

Thanks for this, Gamaliel. Warning of approaching lorry duly noted.

I've also forgotten what board I'm posting in, so I sympathise! My penchant is for reasoned, measured argument in Hell, sorry Hell Hosts...
 

---

Posted by MrsBeaky (# 17663) on :
 
This is my first time posting on one of the ship’s boards so please don’t eat me for breakfast if I break any etiquette or technical rules...and please, please don’t SHOUT at me as I hate it.....which leads me on to want I’d like to say about “power prayers” but in this instance specifically prayers for healing
Firstly my context so you know what’s formed me: I was brought up as a Roman Catholic and am now an Eucharistic Anglican and during all the many intervening years have worshipped at almost every possible other type of church both in the UK and abroad. My husband and I are currently working with the Anglican Church in Kenya in a Justice and Peace initiative. I have been involved in many situations of prayer for people who are very ill/ afflicted and the conclusion I have come to is that I should try to be a “channel” as in the prayer of St Francis. I deeply regret having condoned by my silence more than one situation in the past (e.g. a pastor shouting at a man born blind for the demon to come out of him) and have been on the receiving/ participating end of several “power prayer” sessions. Just what they achieve is perhaps questionable but I am always willing to listen to someone’s own story of answered prayer because I would never want to dishonour anyone’s spiritual walk.
But here’s the thing. I have travelled with several friends and family members (one my youngest daughter) on their journeys with cancer: some have died; some have seen wonderful turnarounds when treatment wasn’t expected to work. All of them were being held in the prayers of many different people with many different theological/ practical approaches to prayer for healing.
To me the bottom line is to be person-centred. Ask the person themselves if they would like prayer and if so how they would like you to pray, explain the styles/ approaches that are possible. Listen to them carefully and then either take them to a service where the style is what they are comfortable with or pray for them yourself, with a heart that is open to be a channel of God’s blessing in whatever form it takes.
 

---

Posted by Baptist Trainfan (# 15128) on :
 
Thank you MrsB for your wise words - and welcome!

We do try to have civilised conversations on this Board (although, like all friends, we do occasionally get on each others' nerves). In Hell, on the other hand, everyone gets a hard time!

[ 01. May 2013, 19:08: Message edited by: Baptist Trainfan ]
 

---

Posted by MrsBeaky (# 17663) on :
 
Thanks for the response and welcome, Baptist Trainfan
I'm looking forward to getting to know you all... if my dodgy internet connection allows me!
 

---

Posted by Komensky (# 8675) on :
 
'Spiritual warfare'?

K
 

---

Posted by Chorister (# 473) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by MrsBeaky:
To me the bottom line is to be person-centred. Ask the person themselves if they would like prayer and if so how they would like you to pray, explain the styles/ approaches that are possible. Listen to them carefully and then either take them to a service where the style is what they are comfortable with or pray for them yourself, with a heart that is open to be a channel of God’s blessing in whatever form it takes.

---

That's a very thoughtful response, MrsBeaky - I am saddened to think that in many prayer situations, this would be thought of as a new idea

[ 03. May 2013, 17:13: Message edited by: Chorister ]
 

---

Posted by MrsBeaky (# 17663) on :
 
Thank you, Chorister
It is sad as you say but that's been my experience in quite a few situations where "power prayers" have been the norm. There's no doubt the people were well-meaning but there was little understanding that the style and content of those prayers could upset the people receiving the prayer.
But I also know lots of people who would disagree with me on this one!
 

---

Posted by Chorister (# 473) on :
 
I have actually refused prayer before, because I knew in that case that the person would pray in such a way I'd find upsetting (due to the conversation we'd had leading up to that point).

Perhaps at times knowing someone is praying for you is more helpful than actually hearing the details of the prayer, however well meant. Unless God is very, very deaf, it shouldn't be necessary for all prayers to be prayed out loud.
 

---

Posted by MrsBeaky (# 17663) on :
 
I quite agree!
 

---

Posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard (# 368) on :
 
Amen MrsBeaky
 

---

Posted by South Coast Kevin (# 16130) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by cliffdweller:
I went to a conference this week featuring as keynote speaker fav open theologian, Greg Boyd. I expected him to address theodicy, of course. I was surprised that he framed that discussion in a defense of "warfare theology". Surprised both because Boyd is a well-known and avid pacifist, and surprised because, like Gamaliel, my time in the Pentecostal community has shown me far more excesses/ dangers/ abuses in the spiritual warfare movement than wins.

---

Sorry to bring up an expired thread, but some videos from this conference that cliffdweller went to are now online. I thought some folks might be interested:

http://reknew.org/2013/05/open2013-speakers-video/
 

---

Posted by cliffdweller (# 13338) on :
 
Ah, I meant to do that myself. Thanks for being on top of it!
 

---

Posted by cliffdweller (# 13338) on :
 
Actually, Kevin's link was from an earlier open theism conference I wasn't able to attend. I double checked the cite for the one I attended, only the first night's session is up so far (Greg Boyd's testimony), the rest is supposed to be up at some point in the future.

Kevin's link is a better one for folks wanting to learn more about Open Theism. But this one is (or will be when they get around to posting the stuff) may be more on point to the OP re: warfare theology & "power prayers"

where warfare theology will be spoken of some day
 

---

Posted by South Coast Kevin (# 16130) on :
 
Oh, whoops - I'll watch that one too, then. Thanks, cliffdweller.
 

---

© Ship of Fools 2016


UBB.classic^TM 6.5.0