Miraculous healings today

[jpbg33]

I'm not the one calling people atheist here and I think if he can dish it out then he can take it to.

and obviously I was just joking.

[B. W.]

RickD can I have mod powers for 30 seconds? Just tell me when my time starts. Promise I'll make really good use of it.

Jac, we do not have zappers... that can shoot out from one's Computer, yet...

Sorry about that

http://videogam.in/categories/NES_Zapper
-
-
-

[Jac3510]

I'm less interested in



than I am in



Because I'd be all like



Sadly, right now, I'm more like

[Kurieuo]

^~~~ that's a Pentecostal, K. I'm sure you can appreciate my revulsion for that kind of foolishness.

[Audie]

Give us a name - just ONE name - of anyone with such a gift, with the ability to perform an instant such transformation or healing, or multiple names of those that have received such an instant miracle, from someone claiming such a gift.

As for my own thoughts on the subject . . .

I think this thread has demonstrated the sad division of the church around healing. I fully grant that there are charlatans. There always have been. Look to Simon Magus in the NT for an old example. So fakers and abusers have been around since the beginning of the church. Further, I take it that it goes back in Judaism long before that, because the Jewish response to Jesus wasn't that he was faking His miracles but rather that He did so by a demonic power. That suggests that they were acquainted with miracle workers in their day. So the question isn't whether or not some people have received any sort of healing. The question, as far as I see it, is the source of healing, how and where it comes from, who it comes through, and its purposes.

So first off, again, I am not a cessationist. Anybody who says that there was a gift of healing in the NT times that is no longer active today is, I think, just not taking the text very seriously. I tend to think that they are reading their experience back into it (pretty standard eisogesis--it's amazing how easy it is to do). The text Crochet quoted I think gives us good biblical reason to think any such gifts are still active. Since the perfect has not yet come, then such gifts have not ceased.

I think the mistake most people make here is that they equate "the gifts of healing" with what the Apostles did. And I would just ask for any textual evidence for that--as if Peter or Paul had "the gift of healing" described in 1 Cor 12. Beyond the superficial similarity that Peter and Paul healed and Paul mentions "healing," what basis is there to say that Paul has the same idea in mind?

I think not. A worthwhile textual note in 1 Cor 12:9, 28, 29 is that that Paul does not speak of "the gift of healing" but rather "gifts of healing." Its in the plural. In all instances that Paul talks of so-called "the gift of healing," he always uses it in the plural. Never the singular. In fact, nowhere in all the Bible do we have a mention of a "gift of healing." Further, in the context, we see that Paul talks about a person receiving a word of knowledge or a word of wisdom or a prophecy, etc. But the gifts of healing and the workings (also plural) of miracles . . . seems to me like Paul isn't talking about some single, abiding gift that someone uses whenever they want. For instance, I don't think someone has "the" gift of tongues, where they can exercise this gift whenever they want. Or let's use one a little less divisive. I doubt that someone has "the" gift of prophecy, where someone can just up and prophesy whenever they want. Rather, when God gives them a word, they speak it.

And I think it's that way with gifts of healing. Each instance of healing is a gift, which means there is no specific ability to give out whereby one can heal whomever they choose whenever they want. If God heals through me in this case, I was given the gift to heal in that case. I may never heal again, just like there were people who spoke only one prophecy (which was a gift, obviously) and never spoke it again. So having said that, I think both cessationists and pentecostals are wrong when they try to identify someone with this special gift that they can sort of whip out whenever they like. Always, in every case, it is God who works through a particular person at a particular time in a particular way. Sometimes it is to share a prophecy. Other times it is to demonstrate a great act of faith. Sometimes it is to share a tongue. Other times it is to heal.

And that gets into the idea that, when God heals, it wasn't the person that healed but God who did it by prayer. Now, I don't deny that sometimes God answers a prayer and heals someone. But I don't think that's the only way God heals. I think the video linked is a great example of something I've seen many, many times. I think that there are times that God uses a specific individual to heal someone else. No one--certainly no one in my denomination--would say that the person is the one who did the healing on account of their gift anymore than someone would say that a person prophesied on their own power or any other such thing. Apply that to ANY gift, and I think you'll see that, in my view anyway, it is silly to object to a gift of healing because it was God and not the person that heals. We recognize that in ALL gifts. But are there some people who lay their hands on someone and ask God to heal, and God does? Absolutely. Just as there are, again, some people who just have this amazing faith. But all Christians have faith! Yes, but God grants as a gift some a special measure in some specific circumstance, and that for the edification of the church.

And that last line is important. I don't think that gifts of healing are given by and large for evangelistic purposes. And this gets at some of the arguments above about why people who God uses this way aren't out there being famous. It's done for the edification of the Body of Christ. I'm not saying, to be clear, that people can't be and aren't saved by witnessing such a miracle. Some have been. But look at the NT itself. That's not what causes people to believe. But it is a way for God to manifest His power in the Church and for her sake. It's a present day reminder that God is the Savior of the whole person, not just this ghosty thing we call a soul. Sometimes, God demonstrates His power over death even today in this fallen world, which is but a taste of the final victory of death we will all see "when the perfect comes."

I think that's a much more consistent view of the gifts of healing. I think the other two extremes--cessationism on one hand and pentecostalism on the other--simply don't do justice to the text as it is written or to biblical theology more generally.

I feel I'm qualified to add my summation on the matter, born out of personal experience, much personal soul searching, and dare I say it, God-given wisdom.

I've experienced many church-named prophets and healers growing up, including my own Mum and Dad. In fact, it was my experience that many Christians (of which I'm familiar) strongly chased after these "experiential gifts of the spirit" -- it's like all Pentecostals strive for in their groups, a higher spirituality so that they are seen as special.

Now, you may come back from that, but fact of the matter is, if you don't associate as Pentecostal, but believe in miraculous healing and the like today, then you are in fact Pentecostal. You may disregard tongues even, nonetheless if you're not cessationist, then you're Pentecostal, perhaps more on the left end then far right.

So, as far as Rick being skeptical, such is healthy. I know many Christians who have claimed such gifts, proclaimed Christ was working through them and the source was God, nonetheless the "special" vessel was them. It is seen as a "spiritual badge" of God's approval of a person. And this, people strive for and seek after it, like one might their own earthly father who never gave them the love, approval and validation they needed as a child.

Many even fully believe in their own experiences and experiential gifts like healing, prophesying, tongues and interpretation thereof and the like. Note that other gifts of the spirit Paul lists in 1 Cor 12:8-11:

• 8 For to one is given the word of wisdom through the Spirit, and to another the word of knowledge according to the same Spirit; 9 to another faith [d]by the same Spirit, and to another gifts of [e]healing [f]by the one Spirit, 10 and to another the [g]effecting of [h]miracles, and to another prophecy, and to another the distinguishing of spirits, to another various kinds of tongues, and to another the interpretation of tongues. 11 But one and the same Spirit works all these things, distributing to each one individually just as He wills.

Spiritual experiences and gifts like healing should be respected no more than intellectual gifts better equipped for teaching. Sadly, many Christians seek after spiritual experiences, the songs become about God revealing Himself to us rather than true worship and thanksgiving.

Given many Christians believe they have this or that, someone being skeptical (like RickD) means nothing to the credibility of the Christian since such Christians often themselves fully believe. So Rick asking for evidence rather than opinion, is quite a valid and doesn't mean he's calling them a liar.

Jac, note in your first video, the couple found it significant to go to the source of the person who preaching healing, this person was considered a vessel of God's healing power. That is common, and I think sad because it places a person's hope in another person (who they often see as more spiritual and blessed by God), rather than in Christ Himself. This is just one pitfall. A second is that Christians then pursue experiences of God, and it is here many feel let down, feel back-slidden or God doesn't love them (if experiences aren't received) -- nothing is further from the truth. And a third, is that many Christians, often with a narcissistic streak, take advantage of others through such.

Take it or leave it from a Christian who grew up on this stuff. There is a lot of destruction caused, placing these spiritual experiences of God before good teaching and just being thankful for what we do know God has done. It was quite painful coming away from such, realising there were natural explanations for spiritual highs and many religious experiences had, though such doesn't discount God was indeed at work. Furthermore, Christianity has no corner on religious experience. Muslims have theirs, Buddhists theirs and then many other religions have spiritual experiences. So then, what makes Christian forms more significant than others?

God developed me in a more rational direction after prayer to reveal Himself fully to me. I've mentioned before on the board, how I prayed for evidence that I could not deny. There was once I felt God ministering to me what gift, and I\d responded wisdom. JWs crossed my path, challenging my beliefs, and reading a book here and there I discovered the prophecies in OT for the first time, by myself, in Daniel. The hairs stood on end as I discovered other prophecies, indeed the very foreshadowings found in Leviticus that Christ fulfilled. I then developed an appetite for reason and theology, apologetical books became a staple for a number of years, and I guess even today.

No one here would probably suspect today, I was akin to those kids in the Jesus Camp movie (though such is extreme even by Pentecostal standards). Kurieuo, he's too rational right? No, God balanced me out, gave me the sustenance and rational base I didn't have to level out my very experiential Christianity. So then, do I deny my experiences? No. I don't even deny the experiences of many Pentecostal Christians.

What I've come to see is God works with our beliefs and so comes to people differently. God didn't wait for us to change our ways and turn from our sin to forgive and love us. Christ died while we were sinners. God meets us wherever we're at, that includes using our beliefs to meet us. Perhaps that is why you hear of more supernatural events in third-world countries, because many in such places carry very spiritual and supernatural beliefs. Similarly that'd mean for Christians who are very experiential, God likely loves them through experience. To those more rationally inclined, God guides in truth and logical arguments, good theology. God will use whatever He has access to and use it for good.

So getting back to your couple, they believed. It was on account of their belief and faith, and prayer to Christ, that God obliged and healing happened. It just so happens, the person they went to, had no special gift really. I don't believe they did. Yet, God is utilising Christian beliefs, and those who fully believe in such, including no doubt the one they visited for prayer to be healed. This then acts as a kind of confirmation bias, yet, it is more the case that God is just using the tools available to Him.

The irony here is that those who believe in the gifts, will more likely get to experience and see such gifts than those who do not believe. God meets us all where we are at. Yet, then, there's enough to suggest that God doesn't act like a genie, but God does so according to His will sometimes working something extraordinary, sometimes not. Nonetheless, those of very Pentecostal persuasion, will and do I believe, personally experience God more than those Christians who aren't such inclined. It makes sense when you think about it. And those who are more rationally inclined, to such God gives them gifts of wisdom and knowledge.

It is worth noting, as I became more informed and theologically grounded, I despaired for a number of years because my spiritual experiences declined. Nonetheless, I still feel God, often through posts and talking with others. Posting often makes me feel closer to God. It's different now. Yet, then, I still get to feel Him and know He is there, feel Him ministering to me. My Christianity is just now different in other ways -- sometimes similar ways, but certainly much different from my younger adolescent years.

Finally, I'm sure many will disagree with my summations above, or parts thereof. That's fine, if you disagree. I can be wrong, but then, much of what I say has been born out of my own experiences of such, soul searching, and learning. So I'm at least qualified I think, if nonetheless wrong here or there.

That is a summation like Melville summed up a whale hunt.

[Kurieuo]

I think is a compliment, having my writing being compared to that of the great Moby ****.

[Audie]

I think is a compliment, having my writing being compared to that of the great Moby ****.

That is progress of a sort. Brevity, without content.

[Kurieuo]

I think is a compliment, having my writing being compared to that of the great Moby ****.

That is progress of a sort. Brevity, without content.

I thought you liked my long writings?

[Audie]

I think is a compliment, having my writing being compared to that of the great Moby ****.

That is progress of a sort. Brevity, without content.

I thought you liked my long writings?

Both you and jac have, betimes, a bent for tugid hyperverboisty.

[Philip]

Both you and jac have, betimes, a bent for tugid hyperverboisty.

But not ME!

With a name like Min, you just know she thinks less is always more!

[Audie]

Both you and jac have, betimes, a bent for tugid hyperverboisty.

But not ME!

With a name like Min, you just know she thinks less is always more!

All five ft and nearly 3/4 inches of me.

You know the saying, a little girl goes a long way.

[Kurieuo]

I think is a compliment, having my writing being compared to that of the great Moby ****.

That is progress of a sort. Brevity, without content.

I thought you liked my long writings?

Both you and jac have, betimes, a bent for tugid hyperverboisty.

Mine is surely longer than Jac's.

[crochet1949]

At the risk of being serious -- miraculous healings of today or anytime-- This world is Temporary. And 'stuff' happens to everyone. And Jesus Did perform miracles in the New Testament -- got people's attention when He did the 'unusual'. The water into wine, healing the sick, making the lame to walk, raising Lazarus from the dead, etc. there is a passage that says if all the acts that Jesus performed were all written down, it would take How Many Pages to recite. Or to that effect. Enough has been recorded to let us know that Jesus' Christ's ministry was alive and active. To point 'us' to God. To show that He was not the ordinary Jewish man -- that He was the Son of God. He would be dying on the cross for all of us / our sins/ paying the price by going to and coming back from hell. Otherwise Everyone Would Be going to hell and Staying there. No person would be going down and Able to come back up when they discovered just how horrible it Was down there.
Back to 'miracles' -- as people can observe -- sometimes God Chooses to heal Now on this earth and sometimes the healing takes place in heaven. But 'whatever the timing is' -- healing Will take place -- the child of God Will get a glorified body the moment they are with Christ for eternity. Those who Haven't? Well -- Scripture doesn't really say. At least not that I'm aware of.
Healings? God Also gives our bodies the ability to heal / cuts heal / burns will heal -- unless there are 3rd degree burns. But our bodies have remarkable ability to heal.
Maybe the problem is that churches / people have gotten so far away From God's Word / that we wouldn't recognize a 'miraculous' healing if/when we saw it. We don't have much faith that God Can do the miraculous.

And -- short answers are Much easier to read.

[Audie]

I think is a compliment, having my writing being compared to that of the great Moby ****.

That is progress of a sort. Brevity, without content.

I thought you liked my long writings?

Both you and jac have, betimes, a bent for tugid hyperverboisty.

Mine is surely longer than Jac's.

Be nice, now.

[Jac3510]

That is progress of a sort. Brevity, without content.

I thought you liked my long writings?

Both you and jac have, betimes, a bent for tugid hyperverboisty.

Mine is surely longer than Jac's.

Be nice, now.

It's not the size of the post that matters.

At least, that's what I keep telling myself.
because my posts are usually way to large
edit:
I decided to edit my longer post to cut the size down a bit since Audie apparently thinks its too long, and if she so thinks, then perhaps others will, too. So for the benefit of the board:

• As for my own thoughts on the subject . . .
  
  I think this thread has demonstrated the sad division of the church around healing. I fully grant that there are charlatans. There always have been. Look to Simon Magus in the NT for an old example. So fakers and abusers have been around since the beginning of the church. Further, I take it that it goes back in Judaism long before that, because the Jewish response to Jesus wasn't that he was faking His miracles but rather that He did so by a demonic power. That suggests that they were acquainted with miracle workers in their day. So the question isn't whether or not some people have received any sort of healing. The question, as far as I see it, is the source of healing, how and where it comes from, who it comes through, and its purposes.
  
  So first off, again, I am not a cessationist. Anybody who says that there was a gift of healing in the NT times that is no longer active today is, I think, just not taking the text very seriously. I tend to think that they are reading their experience back into it (pretty standard eisogesis--it's amazing how easy it is to do). The text Crochet quoted I think gives us good biblical reason to think any such gifts are still active. Since the perfect has not yet come, then such gifts have not ceased.
  
  I think the mistake most people make here is that they equate "the gifts of healing" with what the Apostles did. And I would just ask for any textual evidence for that--as if Peter or Paul had "the gift of healing" described in 1 Cor 12. Beyond the superficial similarity that Peter and Paul healed and Paul mentions "healing," what basis is there to say that Paul has the same idea in mind?
  
  I think not. A worthwhile textual note in 1 Cor 12:9, 28, 29 is that that Paul does not speak of "the gift of healing" but rather "gifts of healing." Its in the plural. In all instances that Paul talks of so-called "the gift of healing," he always uses it in the plural. Never the singular. In fact, nowhere in all the Bible do we have a mention of a "gift of healing." Further, in the context, we see that Paul talks about a person receiving a word of knowledge or a word of wisdom or a prophecy, etc. But the gifts of healing and the workings (also plural) of miracles . . . seems to me like Paul isn't talking about some single, abiding gift that someone uses whenever they want. For instance, I don't think someone has "the" gift of tongues, where they can exercise this gift whenever they want. Or let's use one a little less divisive. I doubt that someone has "the" gift of prophecy, where someone can just up and prophesy whenever they want. Rather, when God gives them a word, they speak it.
  
  And I think it's that way with gifts of healing. Each instance of healing is a gift, which means there is no specific ability to give out whereby one can heal whomever they choose whenever they want. If God heals through me in this case, I was given the gift to heal in that case. I may never heal again, just like there were people who spoke only one prophecy (which was a gift, obviously) and never spoke it again. So having said that, I think both cessationists and pentecostals are wrong when they try to identify someone with this special gift that they can sort of whip out whenever they like. Always, in every case, it is God who works through a particular person at a particular time in a particular way. Sometimes it is to share a prophecy. Other times it is to demonstrate a great act of faith. Sometimes it is to share a tongue. Other times it is to heal.
  
  And that gets into the idea that, when God heals, it wasn't the person that healed but God who did it by prayer. Now, I don't deny that sometimes God answers a prayer and heals someone. But I don't think that's the only way God heals. I think the video linked is a great example of something I've seen many, many times. I think that there are times that God uses a specific individual to heal someone else. No one--certainly no one in my denomination--would say that the person is the one who did the healing on account of their gift anymore than someone would say that a person prophesied on their own power or any other such thing. Apply that to ANY gift, and I think you'll see that, in my view anyway, it is silly to object to a gift of healing because it was God and not the person that heals. We recognize that in ALL gifts. But are there some people who lay their hands on someone and ask God to heal, and God does? Absolutely. Just as there are, again, some people who just have this amazing faith. But all Christians have faith! Yes, but God grants as a gift some a special measure in some specific circumstance, and that for the edification of the church.
  
  And that last line is important. I don't think that gifts of healing are given by and large for evangelistic purposes. And this gets at some of the arguments above about why people who God uses this way aren't out there being famous. It's done for the edification of the Body of Christ. I'm not saying, to be clear, that people can't be and aren't saved by witnessing such a miracle. Some have been. But look at the NT itself. That's not what causes people to believe. But it is a way for God to manifest His power in the Church and for her sake. It's a present day reminder that God is the Savior of the whole person, not just this ghosty thing we call a soul. Sometimes, God demonstrates His power over death even today in this fallen world, which is but a taste of the final victory of death we will all see "when the perfect comes."
  
  I think that's a much more consistent view of the gifts of healing. I think the other two extremes--cessationism on one hand and pentecostalism on the other--simply don't do justice to the text as it is written or to biblical theology more generally.

Better?