|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Are 'power' prayers helpful?
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
Yes, Truman ... when I was involved in more full-on charismatic circles you'd hear stories about this sort of thing - people who felt 'led' or moved to pray 'commanding prayers', if that's the right terminology - with spectacular results.
I'll repeat that again, 'you'd hear stories ...'
We'd hear stories but I can never actually remember seeing anything happen in response to prayer of this kind. It was a lot of fuss and noise and blather.
How would the guy trying to drag someone out of a wheelchair know whether he was being an idiot or whether he was 'under the anointing' as we'd have put it in those days?
Trial and error doesn't seem pastorally responsible to me.
You end up with shed-loads of pastoral damage to repair, you end up leaving a lot of damage in your wake.
I understand that the newly born grandchild of some people I knew from my full-on charismatic days is on a life-support system and it's touch and go. People are praying for a miracle.
What should we do in such instances? Go into the hospital and 'command' healing in the name of Jesus? On the social-media thread where I learned this, people are posting all sorts of stuff about 'speaking life in the name of Jesus' and so on.
The child may pull through - I sure hope so.
But what if it it doesn't?
How should we pray?
I'd suggest that we pray for the child, the parents, the medical professionals and the wider circle of friends and family ... and prepare ourselves for whatever outcome. To comfort and support the family if they face loss, to rejoice with them if the child recovers.
Where does 'commanding prayer' come into this scenario?
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Baptist Trainfan
Shipmate
# 15128
|
Posted
Folk supporting this kind of prayer often cite the Biblical stories where Christians appear to "do things" in the name of Jesus (e.g. the healing of the man at the Beautiful Gate). Or else they refer to certain statements of Jesus about prayer. And - as others have said - we mustn't dismiss these out of hand.
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").
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?
Silly and irrelevant P.S. A Christian from another tradition was attending a Pentecostal church. During the service the Minister prayed in a way which seemed to be aggressive and too loud.
The Christian later spoke to the Minister and remonstrated, "You don't need to shout at God, you know; he isn't deaf". And the response came back, "Ah; he isn't frightened, either".
[ 15. April 2013, 13:05: Message edited by: Baptist Trainfan ]
Posts: 9750 | From: The other side of the Severn | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
hee hee ...
Yes, I've come across all that sort of thing. I don't tend to think that this sort of thing comes from a thought-through position - 'your cancer/alcohol problem/delete-as-appropriate problem is directly demonic in origin.'
It's more a case of copy-cat behaviour or people imbibing the way they've seen it done or taught from platforms or on God TV etc.
I doubt if people like South Coast Kevin really take that dualistic and reductionist a view of the world ... with all due respect for the lad, I suspect he's only going by what he's heard/learned in the Vineyard which was heavily influenced by Wimber's approach to these things.
If you ask me, it's all a case of a spirituality looking for a theology.
The NT is certainly cited, but in a wonky and one-sided way.
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Laurelin
Shipmate
# 17211
|
Posted
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. ![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
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.
--------------------
"I fear that to me Siamese cats belong to the fauna of Mordor." J.R.R. Tolkien
Posts: 545 | From: The Shire | Registered: Jul 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
South Coast Kevin
Shipmate
# 16130
|
Posted
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 ( ![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif) ) - 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.
--------------------
My blog - wondering about Christianity in the 21st century, chess, music, politics and other bits and bobs.
Posts: 3309 | From: The south coast (of England) | Registered: Jan 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
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.
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Baptist Trainfan
Shipmate
# 15128
|
Posted
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. ![[Ultra confused]](graemlins/confused2.gif)
Posts: 9750 | From: The other side of the Severn | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
South Coast Kevin
Shipmate
# 16130
|
Posted
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?
'Lord, if it be thy will' is addressing God, asking him to heal, remove the demonic influence or whatever.
'If there is anything demonic here, I command you to get out of here' is addressing the evil spirit directly. That's the difference.
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
I'm not quite sure what you mean by 'overall theological and literary context', but what I'm saying is part of the so-called warfare worldview'. There's definitely a theological underpinning, albeit one you have concerns about.
And I'd wholeheartedly agree with you that there's a lot of bad practice in this area, and no doubt I've been involved in some. But I don't think this should cause us to shy away from praying with people (if we believe in that sort of thing at all) - the remedy for misuse is right use, not no use.
EDIT - Baptist Trainfan: definitely my fault, as there's no sign of my post. You haven't missed anything of mine, don't worry!
[ 15. April 2013, 15:31: Message edited by: South Coast Kevin ]
--------------------
My blog - wondering about Christianity in the 21st century, chess, music, politics and other bits and bobs.
Posts: 3309 | From: The south coast (of England) | Registered: Jan 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
Ok ... so because Jesus apparently addressed demons directly that means that we should, right?
The point I'm making is that an overly literal approach to the text in instances like this leads to all manner of bad practice. Take the Book of Job, for instance. Are we saying that there was a literal conversation in heaven between God and the Devil in which God agreed to allow the Devil to zap Job's family and afflict him with boils and so on?
Or are we dealing with a literary device here?
I'm suggesting that there are literary devices and tropes in the Gospels and Acts that we need to be aware of when we try to understand them.
I'm not suggesting that this means that the miracles didn't happen - simply that the way they are presented is in terms that use literary and rhetorical effects - same as with any other literature.
I'm not accusing you of being woodenly fundamentalist or anything, but you do seem to take an almost alarmingly literal approach to some of this stuff ... as if we are to literally go around addressing demons and so on.
Yes, I do believe in a demonic dimension, I do believe in forces of evil and so on but I don't go around having conversations with demons.
Sure, we can pray for people and so on but I don't see why we have to subscribe to an overly dualistic worldview in order to do so.
If you want some proper theology on this sort of thing read Nigel Wright the Baptist's 'A Theology of the Darkside.'
He comes from a charismatic background yet he doesn't go in for all this addressing demons and rebuking the spirit of having a cold or the spirit of belly-button fluff and all the rest of it ...
Don't get me wrong, I do believe in the demonic and so on but it cheapens the whole thing if we go around seeing the devil's sticky paw-prints everytime someone gets the flu or stubs their toe.
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Lyda*Rose
Ship's broken porthole
# 4544
|
Posted
I had an acquaintance who went to a Pentecostal church. But her opinions on demons were rather different from some of her bretheran. She thought of demons as spiritual germs. They could be as negligible as a cold or as bad as polio and both just as unintelligent. But she'd as soon address a demon as address a rhinovirus. She'd pray for healing from God, but she wouldn't bother talking to the pesky buggers.
--------------------
"Dear God, whose name I do not know - thank you for my life. I forgot how BIG... thank you. Thank you for my life." ~from Joe Vs the Volcano
Posts: 21377 | From: CA | Registered: May 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
Absolutely, Lyda Rose.
Why have a conversation with them? Why even give them the time of day?
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Baptist Trainfan
Shipmate
# 15128
|
Posted
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.'
Nigel was my lecturer in Theology at Spurgeon's College in the late 80s (excellent). He had just published an earlier version of the book (also excellent) called "The Fair Face of Evil". Unfortunately the cover simply said, "The FF of Evil: Nigel Wright" which kinda gave the wrong impression ...
Posts: 9750 | From: The other side of the Severn | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
Ha ha ... yes, I heard about the change of title.
The book is well worth a read and comes with a foreword by Andrew Walker.
Back in the late 90s/early 2000s the triumvirate of Wright, Walker and Tom Smail issued a number of thoughtful reflections on the charismatic scene which I found immensely helpful.
All three are grateful to the charismatic movement and are by no means unduly critical. But they do bring some interesting and insightful perspectives to bear to which, I submit, anyone involved in the charismatic scene would do well to heed.
I'd go so far as to say that it was their books/thoughts/conferences that kept me sane at that time and prevented me from some kind of depressed state of charismatic burn-out.
I owe them a great deal.
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
The Rhythm Methodist
Shipmate
# 17064
|
Posted
Some really good posts on this thread - I'll try not to spoil it. Just a couple of thoughts:
I think 'commanding prayer' may be a bit of a misnomer, at least if we think of prayer as addressing God. Modern practitioners of this method are not speaking to him. They talk to illnesses, demons (real or imagined) or perhaps to the individual concerned.
Their model appears to be loosely based on some incidents involving a few of the Apostles, and the ministry of the ‘72’. I suppose this raises the initial question as to whether Christ intended that his specific commission to the 72 was meant to stand in perpetuity (and for any or all of his later followers). Should that be the case, we could then consider whether the current activity is a legitimate and faithful expression of that ministry. Is what we see now - in terms of authority, power and motivation - essentially similar? Is it comparable in style and substance? Perhaps there is a clue in the relative efficacy between the biblical accounts and the more recent events.
Then there is this, from James 5:13-14, “ Is anyone among you sick? Let them call the elders of the church to pray over them and anoint them with oil in the name of the Lord.” If commanding sicknesses to leave was supposed to be the norm, then it seems strange that a more protracted and messy process should have been added by the time that letter was written. The ‘James version’ later places the emphasis on the righteousness of the person praying – something which (in my experience) never comes up with the command method. Indeed, some of those who engage in commanding are only too happy to blame their client when the desired result fails to materialise….usually, along the lines that they lack faith or are secret sinners.
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.
Posts: 202 | From: Wales | Registered: Apr 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
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.
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
@The Rhythm Methodist ... ![[Overused]](graemlins/notworthy.gif)
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.
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Inanna
Ship's redhead
# 538
|
Posted
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.
--------------------
All shall be well
And all shall be well
And all manner of things shall be well.
Posts: 1495 | From: Royal Oak, MI | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
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 ...
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
South Coast Kevin
Shipmate
# 16130
|
Posted
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 ...
Sorry I've just not had time over the last couple of days to join in with this discussion properly but can I point out a couple of things quickly here?
I for one am not oblivious to the damage that can be caused by 'power' praying. I know it's there, and I know people can be left with the feeling there's something morally wrong with them if they aren't healed. But I'm pretty sure I've seen in my own church that this can be avoided, with careful and sensitive direction from the church leaders. Having said that, I appreciate the position of people who decide not to pray in this way (preferring to ask God instead) because of the potential for damage of the kind Inanna and others have pointed out.
Second point; Gamaliel, you could be right that most people who do 'power' praying haven't thought through the theological implications. I've not seen enough examples in settings other than my own church to make a judgement for myself. But I feel I do have a reasonable theological basis myself. Your comment, 'At least not in the way that the rest of us might recognise' - doesn't that simply mean you disagree with my theological position, not that I don't have a theological position?
--------------------
My blog - wondering about Christianity in the 21st century, chess, music, politics and other bits and bobs.
Posts: 3309 | From: The south coast (of England) | Registered: Jan 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
I might not have made myself clear ... I wasn't saying that you don't have a theological position. You clearly do. That's evident in the way you post here.
I was being deliberately provocative and snarky to some extent - hence the tongue-in-cheek 'he said snootily' remark.
All that said, I think it is axiomatic that the charismatic scene as a whole can justly be described as 'a spirituality in search of a theology'.
The reality is that there just ain't that much actual theology around in some of these circles - simply a semblance of it.
I'd have reacted angrily at such an assertion at one time but the more I've hobnobbed with people across a wider spectrum than simply charismatic evangelical fellowships - which would have been my main milieu at one time - the more I realise how much rich and munchy theology there is out there that we weren't even aware of.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that charismatics are thick, stupid or uneducated - they clearly aren't. But there's something of a disconnect in their overall approach, it seems to me. One could probably make similar observations about different aspects of theology and spirituality in other settings too - whether liberal Protestant, liberal catholic or the more conservative kinds of Catholic and Orthodox settings too.
I can only speak as I find.
By and large, theological reflection in the more revivalist of settings is wanting.
I fully appreciate that the Vineyard is at the milder end of the spectrum and doesn't go in for ranting and bellowing and whooping and hollerin' and hype and so on.
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?
It's the point I was making about the literary aspects of the Gospel accounts and Acts. There's a literary aspect in there that charismatics often overlook when they attempt to mine these passages for proof-texts as to how we should go about 'doing the stuff.'
So it's hardly surprising that there are so many spectacular failures when they try to apply 'the stuff' - because they don't understand the context, the literary intention nor the way the Church (collectively) has understood this sort of thing down the years.
That's what I'm getting at.
Such theological reflection as there is has a tendency towards dualism ... the powers of good versus the powers of evil in a kind of computer-game type way.
Now, don't get me wrong, I'm talking general trends here. There are always exceptions to every rule and some of the charismatic dudes are pretty well-read and switched on.
But I'd still suggest that they are operating from a pretty wonky frame of reference much of the time - including a tendency towards dualism and even an almost Gnostic approach at the extremes.
You may do your 'commanding' and addressing demons and so on in a more measured and less hype-filled way, but whilst that may make it more acceptable than the shouty alternatives it doesn't obviate the fact that you might just - might just - be operating for skewed premisses in the first place.
Read the Nigel Wright book and you'll grasp what I'm getting at.
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
You goin' soft on us Gamaliel ?
quote:
Which isn't to say that some of this stuff doesn't happen from time to time.
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
No, I'm not 'going soft' at all, Martin.
I'm simply acknowledging that my world-view/theology does have space for the unexplained, for the possibility of miracles and for healings in response to prayer.
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. 'See, this Jesus is able to cast out demons with a word, able to expel sickness and calm the sea, raise the dead etc with a simple command ... he's pretty special ... he's actually God incarnate ...'
And a corollary of that, 'Look, some of his disciples were given authority to do similar things too, they shared in some way in his divine nature ...'
South Coast Kevin maintains that this 'command' type prayers are the only ones recorded in the NT. Yes, and for good reason, because the NT is there to record/pass on the belief of the early Christians that God was in Christ reconciling the world to himself - that something pretty powerful had happened in cosmic soteriological terms.
I don't see how there's anything 'soft' about remaining open to the possibility that God could - if he chose - heal people in our local churches or out on the street or wherever else.
What I'm not claiming is that we have necessarily have some kind of individual mandate to go around 'commanding' things and performing acts of power etc.
It seems to me that the NT suggests that certain people were so gifted - in the same way that others had various other kinds of gifting, such as administration etc.
If we're going to look at it from an Anglican/Wesleyan quadrilateral sense (among others) then let's look at scripture, reason, tradition and experience.
Scripture suggests that these things happened and may happen again.
Reason says that if God is God then that remains a possibility.
Tradition suggests that some people at some times do seem to have been able to perform powerful things through prayer.
As for experience - well, I've yet to see any 'commanding' type prayers achieve anything other than chivvy people into an over-egged sense of expectation whereby their hopes and expectations will ultimately be dashed ... sometimes cruelly.
So it doesn't pass muster on the quadrilateral test.
Therefore I reject the practice as poor practice based on poor theology.
Is that soft?
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
Steady on old chap!
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
chris stiles
Shipmate
# 12641
|
Posted
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.
I'm sure that they happened at all is also at least partly down to theological reasons (just because the word 'literary' will lead to furrowing eyebrows in certain circles).
Posts: 4035 | From: Berkshire | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
Sure, I'm saying that there are both literary AND theological reasons for the way these things are presented in the scriptures.
Neither of these reasons necessarily undermines any belief that they actually happened - nor that things like this can or could happen should the Lord will it to be so ...
But the fact that there are literary and theological considerations to be taken account of in the way we understand these things in context does, it seems to me, give some pause to the blithe suggestion that we can all go around 'commanding' this, that and the other and seeing the same kind of results.
The onus is on those who make these claims to demonstrate that they do see the same kind of results that we read about in the NT.
I don't see any evidence that they are achieving anything like the same results and effects - and certainly now more than people who pray in the 'Lord please heal this person' type way which South Coast Kevin claims to find so unbiblical.
If what South Coast Kevin is saying is correct then surely we would be entitled to see rather more healings and spectacular results than is actually the case.
As I've said before, it's a matter of record that Wimber and his teams turned their attention to so-called inner-healing and theandric and thaumaturgical (I like having the opportunity to use those words!) effects other than physical healing precisely because they were seeing far fewer actual physical healings than were being claimed in the books and form the platforms.
To be fair to Wimber, he would often admit when he got things wrong - but his theology was as over-egged as a Spanish omelette on steroids.
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
Besides, if 'literary' furrows the brow in some circles, let brows be furrowed ...
I mean, c'mon, most sensible conservative evangelical scholars and commentators accept a literary dimension. These things aren't new.
I've got a very conservative commentary on the Old Testament here that readily acknowledges that the Covenants with Israel follow the pattern of contemporary vassal-treaties and that some people understand the Book of Jonah and the Book of Job in a literary rather than the factual/historical kind of way that some more fundamentalist types approach them.
I don't think South Coast Kevin would misunderstand what I mean by 'literary' ... he wasn't sure what I was getting at earlier but I'm sure he's more than capable of grasping the concept that some scriptural passages were written in the way they are in order to achieve a heightened literary effect - as well as to make theological points.
I'm sure he could point to examples of this too if he were to go looking for them.
I'm not saying anything, as you'll undoubtedly be aware, that is incompatible with a conservatively theological approach to these matters.
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
chris stiles
Shipmate
# 12641
|
Posted
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.
Absolutely. I was just pointing out that there is both theological significance to how these things are presented as well as that they happened at that particular time at all.
The latter offers a further reason to be skeptical about those who claim to be just 'doing what Jesus did'.
Posts: 4035 | From: Berkshire | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
Indeed - I think thee and me are on the same page with this one, Chris.
Context, context, context.
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
South Coast Kevin
Shipmate
# 16130
|
Posted
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?
But with the healing stuff it's more than 'Jesus did it'. He told his disciples to do it, and we have several accounts of his disciples doing it.
I really understand the position that some people having regarding healing, which says it doesn't happen any more. But for those of us who believe it does (or can) happen today, I'm simply suggesting we pray in the way shown to us by the New Testament.
And yes, I take the point about literary purposes and styles in the Bible. But it's not enough to use that as a kind of excuse for ignoring parts of the Bible we aren't comfortable with. I think we have to put forward a specific literary / theological argument if we want to say a certain passage shouldn't be taken at face value. What's the specific argument for not taking plainly the way Jesus and the NT Christians dealt with healing?
(By way of example, Genesis 1 has poetic / mythological elements and so IMO can be taken as something other than a straight claim as to how the universe came into being.)
--------------------
My blog - wondering about Christianity in the 21st century, chess, music, politics and other bits and bobs.
Posts: 3309 | From: The south coast (of England) | Registered: Jan 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
Sure, South Coast Kevin, but in my experience it's not the people who don't have a great deal of faith or expectation for miracles and healings to take place who have to bend over backwards to find excuses/reasons for these things not happening but those who do ...
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 ...'
Rather than, 'He politely asked the Lord if he wouldn't mind healing this sickness ... if it wasn't too much trouble ...'
Yes, we do see examples of the disciples healing people through prayer or 'command' in the NT and some have suggested that this applies to the 70 primarily - or to the immediate disciples.
To balance against that, 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.
We're told that it's the 'prayer of faith' that will make people well and also there's the incident in the Gospels where Jesus himself didn't heal many people at Nazareth because of the peoples' unbelief.
Granted.
But it's a big step from that to taking it upon ourselves to go around 'commanding' healing and so on.
I'm not disregarding or overlooking these passages because I'm uncomfortable with them - it's not the verses I'm uncomfortable with, it's the contemporary practice that seems to have been derived from them - and in a completely out-of-context way - that troubles me.
If there were plenty of instances of people being miraculously healed or delivered from demons or whatever else because people from the Vineyard, NFI or other charismatic groups were going around 'commanding' these things in the name of Jesus, I wouldn't have an issue.
But the reality is, they aren't. At least nowhere near on the scale that is claimed.
So I have a decision to make.
Either I decide that the scriptures are 'wrong' or I consider that the practice of some of these groups are misapplied because they haven't properly engaged with the literary and theological context.
I'm inclined towards the latter position.
If the late John Wimber, current Vineyard members, New Wine afficionados, Bethel advocates and the various NFI and similar charismatic groups could show me that their 'commanding' prayers and ... well ... 'commandments' were actually having any significant effect then I might change my mind.
As it is, they can't.
It's poor theology leading to poor practice.
That doesn't mean that I'm a cessationist, it doesn't mean that healings no longer happen.
But it does mean that I have good grounds for my assertion that the theology and practice of these groups is wonky in this particular area.
It doesn't mean, either, that I'm not taking the way that Jesus and his disciples dealt with healing at face-value ... but it does mean that I am at the same time taking into account the theological and literary aspects of these accounts.
To say, 'Peter healed that guy at the Beautiful Gate by a word of command, therefore I can do the same and I'm going down town this afternoon to prove it ...' doesn't strike me as anything other than an overly simplistic engagement with the text - not to say downright hubris.
You've cited Genesis as having evident mythological/rhetorical elements. So do the Gospels, so does the Book of Acts - not necessarily in the same way, but they are there.
I'm not doubting the historicity of the Acts narrative but the way its presented bears a lot of similarities to classical hero narratives - it's a kind of Roman era 'novel' in some respects. That doesn't mean it's fictitious but there are clearly elements of rhetoric and hyperbole - 'Herod was eaten by worms and died' for instance.
There are other instances. The story of the shipwreck in Acts doesn't strike me as a straight-forward piece of narrative either - although that doesn't mean it isn't based on an actual shipwreck and real events.
It's not a case of my being uncomfortable with particular Bible passages.
The onus is on those who go round 'commanding' and 'claiming' things and so on to explain why their practices don't elicit the same results that we read about in the Gospels and Acts. And in a way which doesn't put the 'blame' onto everyone else - their lack of faith and what-have-you ...
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alisdair
Shipmate
# 15837
|
Posted
A couple of things I would like to add to the discussion:
I spend a large part of my working life with people who are seriously ill and with those who are terminally ill---I work as a hospital chaplain.
It interests me that while many of the people who I see want me to pray with/for them, very few ask to be healed. Is this because they lack faith? Is it because they are aware that such prayer hardly ever results in healing? Is it because they don't fancy their chances being prayed for by me?
Whatever the reasons people are still very keen to pray, and to be prayed for.
And every now and again amazing unaccountable things happen, and not necessarily to folk who are 'card carrying' Christians, or whatever.
On top of all that is the undoubted fact that once physically healed we will, sooner or later, get sick again, and one day we will die.
For most of the people I see what concerns them is not staving off the inevitable course of life for ever, but facing it with some degree of grace and, if possible, a genuine hope that they are in good hands. Such hope, if it comes, often seems to reflect a more fundamental 'healing' than merely getting the body to put in a few more circuits round the sun, welcome as that may be.
Jesus certainly did seem to send his disciples out to heal the sick. Through learning and technology we can do that today in a way unimaginable to the folk of Jesus' era. But I really wonder what kind of 'healing' he actually had in mind.
Posts: 334 | From: Washed up in England | Registered: Aug 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
Sure - I think that's right, Alisdair.
It doesn't pay to be too 'prescriptive' about these things, I don't think.
I have a friend who is a physiotherapist who can tell all sorts of stories of remarkable recoveries and sudden alleviations and remissions of all manner of long-standing orthopaedic problems without faith, prayer or anything else of the kind being involved.
She can also cite plenty of instances where people have been prayed for and with no observable result. And, to be fair, instances where people did appear to improve once family, friends or church groups began to pray for them.
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. Conversely, he can tell of others who faced death with dignity and fortitude despite not having any faith whatsoever.
We can't 'legislate' for any of these things.
Which is why I cannot accept South Coast Kevin's apparent claim that if only we started praying as Jesus and the disciples prayed ie. commanding sickness to depart and so on - we'd be more likely to see results.
We might well see an increase in claimed results - people have to find evidence or some scrap of testimony or other to bolster or back-up some of these claims ...
But we're far more likely, it seems to me to see more of what we've already seen - appalling pastoral situations, people being led up the garden path only to be let down with an almighty bump and much else besides.
And the issue of the attention turning from physical healing to things it's a lot easier to induce or encourage - such as people falling over, laughing, crying, emoting in some way or other that is then claimed to be a work of the Spirit.
When the physical healings don't transpire on cue, people turn their attention to other thaumaturgical interventions.
Ok, so the occasional genuine recovery or healing may very well take place in and amongst - and the law of averages states that those people who believe in such things are more likely to see such things happen (whether real or imagined) than those who don't.
But as you say, Alisdair, there are indeed other issues that people are concerned with - a listening ear, a reassuring arm around the shoulder - and yes, prayer too.
Now I'd like South Coast Kevin to explain how you could be more effective in your chaplaincy ministry by 'taking authority' and commanding healing and so on and so forth ...
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Laurelin
Shipmate
# 17211
|
Posted
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. ![[Frown]](frown.gif) 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.
--------------------
"I fear that to me Siamese cats belong to the fauna of Mordor." J.R.R. Tolkien
Posts: 545 | From: The Shire | Registered: Jul 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Nenya
Shipmate
# 16427
|
Posted
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 ![[Biased]](wink.gif) 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.
--------------------
They told me I was delusional. I nearly fell off my unicorn.
Posts: 1289 | Registered: May 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
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.
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
South Coast Kevin
Shipmate
# 16130
|
Posted
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.
I've read that the reference in James to 'those who are sick' could just as well be translated 'those who are weak', implying weak in faith. Can anyone shed light on how valid this suggestion is?
As for the issue of whether the command kind of prayers are more or less effective than the request kind; I have no sense either way and I'm not even sure I want to claim the command prayer should be more effective. For me, it's simply a matter of obedience to what I see in the New Testament and also a lack (AIUI) of theological basis for not following the NT practice.
--------------------
My blog - wondering about Christianity in the 21st century, chess, music, politics and other bits and bobs.
Posts: 3309 | From: The south coast (of England) | Registered: Jan 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
I've replied to your PM on this one, South Coast Kevin.
My answer would essentially be that you are taking as the NT norm what may have been the preserve of certain individuals by and large - the 12, the 70, Paul ...
We don't have any NT record of how any Christians beyond those particular groups prayed.
I'd also suggest that if praying in this way were obedient to NT norms then we should expect to see NT results. We don't.
Somehow, there's a disconnect.
Either the NT is wrong or your application of it is incorrect.
Baldly.
No prizes for guessing which alternative I'd plump for ...
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
Whether we are cessationist or not, God the Holy Spirit is.
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
Hmmm ... I'm not sure that follows, Martin ... but the more spectacularly interventionist stuff seems few and far between ...
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76
|
Posted
Long time since I was a charismatic, but I was just thinking about that line in Common people (I know it's about rich and poor, but bear with me)
You'll never get it right
When you're lying in bed at night
Watching roaches climb the walls
You can call your daddy and he can end it all
Or words to that effect.
Frequent, predictable and clear miraculous intervention would put is in the position of the girl in the song. We'd not really be living in this world. We'd be playing at it, because every time it got a bit too difficult, we could call on God and he would end it all.
But we are living in this world, and for it to be the real world, we cannot just call on daddy and expect him to end it all. He doesn't.
Just a thought.
--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.
Posts: 17938 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
cliffdweller
Shipmate
# 13338
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard:
Whether we are cessationist or not, God the Holy Spirit is.
Isn't that just a convoluted way of trying to highjack the Lord into your game of "I'm right and you're wrong-- because I say so".
--------------------
"Here is the world. Beautiful and terrible things will happen. Don't be afraid." -Frederick Buechner
Posts: 11242 | From: a small canyon overlooking the city | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
The Rhythm Methodist
Shipmate
# 17064
|
Posted
Originally posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard:
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.
Posts: 202 | From: Wales | Registered: Apr 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
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.
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
The Rhythm Methodist ![[Smile]](smile.gif) and and ![[Angel]](graemlins/angel.gif) and even ![[Votive]](graemlins/votive.gif) but above all ![[Axe murder]](graemlins/lovedrops.gif)
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
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alisdair
Shipmate
# 15837
|
Posted
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.
Posts: 334 | From: Washed up in England | Registered: Aug 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
The Rhythm Methodist
Shipmate
# 17064
|
Posted
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.
That's a bang-on assessment of the process, Gamaliel!
The "gradual abandonment of the critical faculties" is how much of this stuff takes root. In some cases I know, there has initially been an almost imperceptible deviation from what may be described as 'sound doctrine and practice'. But as that road goes on, it inevitably takes people further from the truth. And although each new diversion may seem small enough of itself, the cumulative effect can be massive.
It presents quite a challenge pastorally, at least to me. Where do you draw the line? Can you really say to one of your flock, "Doing X in church may seem harmless right now, but in two years time, you'll be obsessed by spiritual mapping, and be casting demons out of your Y fronts?"
I never put it that way, but I do tend to pull the plug pretty quickly - if only for the sake of others. I had a guy come in a few years back, who started with all that 'authority-taking' and 'commanding'. I let him finish, and - when we were satisfied no healings had taken place - I had a quiet word with him....not least because several people had been upset by his shouting. He's still with us - still has occassional relapses into other areas of dubious practices - and still gets roasted when he does. I'm not sure what our fellowship would be like now, if nothing was ever said....but the smart money would be on completely off-the-wall, or perhaps closed. I'm convinced he (and others) think I "quench the Spirit". Maybe they have a point from time to time. My view is that if God wants to take us to Jerusalem I'd very much welcome it....but we won't get there via Corinth.
Anyhow, you nailed the problem,Gamaliel. I'm still working on the solution.
@Martin
I am proud to be called "brother" by you, even if I am not worthy of such an honour.
I feel the same affinity, because - for all our doctrinal differences - I recognise the love of Christ in you.
It was most uplifting to read about you and your wife, the gulf between your respective beliefs - and how it doesn't matter. It is a beautiful testimony to the supremacy of love. I have found that all too easy to forget at times, and there have been moments in my life when love was contingent upon someone embracing my version of doctrinal rectitude.
I will PM you at some point, though I'm swamped with stuff at the mo. I was amused by your rejection - in advance - of any instances of divine intervention I might bring up. I was also a bit challenged by it.I'm sure I have dismissed things out of hand (and in advance) but have not had the courage/integrity to own up to it.
Posts: 202 | From: Wales | Registered: Apr 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
I'm not sure there is a one-size-fits-all solution, The Rhythm Methodist, but 'working on one' seems along the right lines.
At times like this, I can understand why the Orthodox are so insistent on never apparently changing anything ... they're concerned lest the slightest deviation can lead into innovation and error.
Within a conservative evangelical context, such as yours, then the boundary-lines are those of accepted small-o orthodoxy and practice - and I think you've identified very well how deviations from this can lead into all manner of malarkey.
I won't name the church, but I'm aware of a large Baptist church in a major city where the leadership are very 'sound' and sensible but allow a certain amount of silly stuff to go on - on the grounds that if some of the people involved didn't have an outlet in the relatively 'safe' context of this particular setting they'd only gravitate to distinctly unsafe alternatives down the road ...
I'm not sure what I think of this as an approach but it has some pragmatic sense to it ... although if it was me, I'd be concerned that the sillier behaviour would spread to others who might be inclined to emulate it. We're talking about grunts and groans and what I'd regard as almost 'nervous tic' type flinching and so on during times of prayer - which these people see as signs of the working of the Holy Spirit - but which I'd be inclined to see as an outflow of nervous energy and suggestibility.
One of the things that's struck me in reading source-documentation (original material) by some of the 18th century revivalists and so on, rather than accounts written second, third, fourth or fifth hand - is how these guys actually clamped down on this kind of behaviour. They didn't go in for the kinds of 'spiritual gurning' and loopier antics that some contemporary revivalists espouse.
I s'pose the solution is to hold the line and to preach and demonstrate sound common sense - as well as a proper contextual reading of the healings, miracles and other spectacular stuff in the NT.
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ray T
Apprentice
# 12499
|
Posted
I don't visit too often, perhaps I should more.
In my life I have found power prayer very unhelpful. My first late wife had a terminal brain tumour at the age of 45. The church I attended at the time offered much prayer, which is right and proper. It was the style of prayer which upset me - I was told to have faith, because faith could move a mountain. I had faith, my mountain didn't move and my wife died. Majority of folks who had prayed / encouraged me to have faith then avoided me.
I was left with the feeling "Was my faith not good enough"?
Many years later, different church, one of our Senior male members also had a brain tumour. Led by the vicar at the time we has many "In Jesus name tumour go" sessions. One person even prayed publicly "God has allowed this tumour to grow in XXXXXX's brain so we could see a great miracle".
Guess what - the tumour didn't go and the gent in question left this mortal coil. The church leadership then pronounced that XXXXXX was healed and whole in Heaven. A lot of condolence to his widow.
I tackled the vicar about the scriptural basis of "God allowing tumours to grow" so us mortals could see a great miracle and the great danger of this teaching philosophy.
The vicar originally from a charismatic C of E Church then pronounced that I had not dealt with my original grief properly and started praying for me!!!
This teaching in me raised hopes which were cruelly dashed. Yes my wife is healed in Heaven but I would have liked her on this world a bit longer, thank you very much.
Yes we should pray for the terminally ill, but not with expectations I have never seen fulfilled in my 50 year Christian life.
Yes I still have a faith and regularly attend a C of E church.
--------------------
Ray T
Posts: 3 | From: Coventry | Registered: Apr 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
South Coast Kevin
Shipmate
# 16130
|
Posted
My condolences to everyone on this thread who has shared personal stories of grief and loss. I can add my own - a lady on the leadership team of my church died last year in her forties, leaving a husband and children behind. We prayed, with some of the prayers being of the 'Be healed in Jesus' name' type. But she wasn't healed. She died.
Of course, we were all left with questions alongside the simple grief of losing a dear woman in the prime of her life. But I still maintain it's possible to pray 'Be healed' without either ramping up expectation or raising questions about people's (lack of) faith if / when healing doesn't happen.
Of course, great harm is possible but I don't see it necessarily following from the commanding type of prayer. Maybe there's a causation - maybe commanding prayer does carry a greater risk of raised expectations and, if healing doesn't come, of implied lack of faith. I think you can deal with those risks but, for those who don't agree, I'd completely understand if you'd rather not pray in the 'Be healed' kind of way.
--------------------
My blog - wondering about Christianity in the 21st century, chess, music, politics and other bits and bobs.
Posts: 3309 | From: The south coast (of England) | Registered: Jan 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
Anadromously:
@South Coast Kevin. What questions? Why? And paradoxically I agree with you, we can say whatever we like, we can use the same forms of words of Jesus and the Disciples and Apostles and all traditions since as LONG as we're honest. 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. And that we acknowledge that. And while we wait for Him to do what He doesn't do, but that His providence MAY (not overruling the laws of physics obviously), that He blesses us with His faith, courage, honesty, compassion, endurance, cheerfulness, humility, joy AND the grief and confusion and alienation and meaninglessness and abandonment He knows as acutely as us while we suffer unto death like Him.
And South Coast Kevin: brother.
@Ray T. Aye you should. Your faith, the faith of Christ TOWERS over the atheist, unreal faith that denies reality, denies God. The faith we all exhibit, the faith that is proclaimed too much - virtually ALL - of the time.
@Gamaliel. Just keep up the good work.
@The Rhythm Methodist. You are worthy. As is South Coast Kevin. Of Jesus' love from and through me. I must therefore apologise. As I will to South Coast Kevin as this develops. I must apologise for challenging you although I'm delighted you were also amused by it. I don't want you to suffer to no good effect from my strong words. Iron to your iron, yes. My dismissal is NOT of your personal, subjective (and THEREFORE real), encounter with the living God, meeting you wherever you have been, but of ANY unfalsifiable claim counter to the laws of physics.
My vicar, with whom I'm meeting at in 25 minutes, testified most affectingly of a woman in Africa being healed of blindness in front of his eyes despite his utterly disbelieving, hopeless prayer.
I want to believe it. And if I went to Angola or Rwanda where such prayers are answered all the time and the dead are raised it would happen despite my unbelief I'm certain.
But not here. Ever. Not where it can be falsified.
Which if TRUE, BOTH true, means God has the greatest sense of humour.
And don't worry about PM. God bless you in your pastorate. Is there anyone like you in Leicester?
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
