Different Gospels

[Vucesa]

I think the pair of you don't understand spiritual gifts. Jesus didn't go around healing every person he came across. How many people were healed at the pool of Bathesda? ONE. Out of how many that sat by that pool trying to be healed? Multitudes. The idea of a "healing ministry" isn't biblical. The point given to what God can do, about poison and healing, and prophecy, and other spiritual gifts doesn't mean you get some super natural power and then go and use it like its the force from Star Wars. The decision and the decision alone rests with God. An example would be, let's say you're a missionary somewhere. One day God could cause you to speak in tongues to give a message to someone so they hear it in their own language. Or to heal someone or to cast out a demon. Someone tries to shoot at you with a gun, but the bullets do nothing because God is protecting you due to the purpose/mission he gave you. It's ALL situational and the decision on what to do and when rests on God alone... not the person. God directs, person complies.

Well said!

 

[rewriter]

Moreso nowadays than every before.



I would travel any distance to see these people work the miracles, those who think they're functioning under the same Gospel as that preached by Christ Jesus, but the bottom line is that they're admitting their false beliefs before our eyes. They do slight of hand things such as pointing to the spiritual gifts, which are not of the same class as those stated by Christ Jesus and quoted in the OP.



Granted. I can say that dare any of these people walk into a hospital and start healing people while preaching the Gospel, I would not run away nor deny what I saw with my own eyes.

In religious services, those clownish exhibits are easily contrived, acted out by people who operate on the warped ethic of "the end justifies the means"...in that its ok to their thinking to portray the falsehoods of their healings in order to bolster the faith of others.

I agree with you about some responses that existed among the ancients who saw Jesus do wonderous things proven by those who knew the poor souls who were healed.

MM

Unfortunately, I can no longer suggest a challenge to you on such a point. The healer I knew who could likely have caused you to lose you balance without even touching you has passed a true healer can never heal themselves. The best I currently know of has a weak healing gift but does have a roughly 90% rate of people being able to feel a difference in a space, often several feet in diameter, that they bless. But neither the healer not the living one tend, to preach while they perform their miracles, if you want preaching from them you need to catch them at other times. Further, their preaching sounds different than one commonly hears, although both would be able to support it with scripture.

 

[Musicmaster]

Unfortunatley you lack discernment(not for the first time) You need to be very close to Christ, for the more you are, the greater the work of the Holy Spirit in your life, the more the gifts of the spirit are shown.
There is head theology, and spiritual discernemnt, and never the twain shall meet

If it's all one gospel, as some of you claim, then you should be able to do all those things Jesus said, and you can't, so the lack isn't on my part.

Nice try.

MM

 

[Musicmaster]

I think the pair of you don't understand spiritual gifts. Jesus didn't go around healing every person he came across. How many people were healed at the pool of Bathesda? ONE. Out of how many that sat by that pool trying to be healed? Multitudes. The idea of a "healing ministry" isn't biblical. The point given to what God can do, about poison and healing, and prophecy, and other spiritual gifts doesn't mean you get some super natural power and then go and use it like its the force from Star Wars. The decision and the decision alone rests with God. An example would be, let's say you're a missionary somewhere. One day God could cause you to speak in tongues to give a message to someone so they hear it in their own language. Or to heal someone or to cast out a demon. Someone tries to shoot at you with a gun, but the bullets do nothing because God is protecting you due to the purpose/mission he gave you. It's ALL situational and the decision on what to do and when rests on God alone... not the person. God directs, person complies.

Thanks for chiming in. Please explain, from your understanding, where there are any stated limitations whatsoever stated in this context, otherwise it not meaning what it says in that those who believe, "...these signs shall follow them that believe." Let's look at the verses together:

Mark 16:15-18
15 And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature.
16 He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.
17 And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues;
18 They shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover.

I always encourage folks to read it all in context, even though there are liberals around who think that context is worthless. That's they're problem.

Additionally, I've seen all kinds of complexities scholars like throw into the topics of the Bible, speaking as if it all needs to filter through and be subject to their complex formulas for understanding, as if it's just plain wrong to take it on the basis of simplicity for what it says.

Please show to us where these verses, in their context, leaves any room for throwing into the mix an idea that there are limitations to the working of the items listed in the above as all being fully operable to all those with faith, all of which Jesus called "signs" rather than giftings:

* "cast out devils"
* "speak with new tongues"
* "take up serpents"
* "drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them"
* "lay hands on the sick and they shall recover."

I welcome your input on this because I'm wondering how this can be coupled with, or injected with, any other limiting factors or operators. I do understand what I think may be your perspective, in that there can't be a totally open field for show and pageantry, thus placing God on display by the powers given to those who might try to abuse it. Yes. However, even in the arena of constraint and controlled usage, why does not one of those who claim to have faith in that Gospel move through life without the ability to do even one of these things on a singular basis, even though that limitations isn't implied within the text?

As stated before, cessationism is the more popular go-to whereby escaping the hot seat is made more easy when dealing with those who are less knowledgeable of the scriptures. Do you lean in that direction?

MM

 

[Musicmaster]

Unfortunately, I can no longer suggest a challenge to you on such a point. The healer I knew who could likely have caused you to lose you balance without even touching you has passed a true healer can never heal themselves. The best I currently know of has a weak healing gift but does have a roughly 90% rate of people being able to feel a difference in a space, often several feet in diameter, that they bless. But neither the healer not the living one tend, to preach while they perform their miracles, if you want preaching from them you need to catch them at other times. Further, their preaching sounds different than one commonly hears, although both would be able to support it with scripture.

Mark 16:15-18
15 And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature.
16 He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.
17 And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues;
18 They shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover.

Please read these passages and share with me where percentages have any room in the text. I'd very much like to understand how that can fit in without it becoming an eisegetical creation. With salvation being the prime mover in these verses, there's no such thing as partially or mostly saved. It's an either-or proposition, as I'm sure we can both agree. So, one either heals those upon whom he laid his hands, or he did not. The demons were cast out entirely, or they were not. The poisons did harm, or they did not. Can we agree with that? If not, please explain why.

MM

 

[Delvianna]

I think may be your perspective, in that there can't be a totally open field for show and pageantry, thus placing God on display by the powers given to those who might try to abuse it.

You are correct. And, (as an example) that you cannot heal someone who God doesn't want healed. So my stance isn't contrary to the verses you're citing. God gives you power temporarily. It's like, "Go heal Sharon", and for that moment in time, God gives you the power to heal Sharon. But if you walk up to someone named Ted and decide to heal him too, doubtful it will work because God didn't tell you to.

However, even in the arena of constraint and controlled usage, why does not one of those who claim to have faith in that Gospel move through life without the ability to do even one of these things on a singular basis, even though that limitations isn't implied within the text?

You'll find that scripture doesn't cross every T or dot every I. Meaning, verses might not give you every single angle of an argument. There is a point, and then they move on. In this case, the point is, that for people who believe, generally, the list of miracles will follow but they're examples and not even a laundry list either as I've heard some incredible miracle stories from people of what God's done. As another example, Elisha was able to make an Ax head float. Does scripture need to define that as a miracle option? If people just go based off these lists (like the verses you gave in Mark), and say here are the spiritual gifts God gives, my argument is then that you're limiting the gifts God can give you.

As stated before, cessationism is the more popular go-to whereby escaping the hot seat is made more easy when dealing with those who are less knowledgeable of the scriptures. Do you lean in that direction?

Personally, I think it's easier to go in the direction of cessationism because they themselves have never done or seen a miracle, so it's easier to argue that they've stopped than to accept the idea that God just hasn't used them. That and just ignorance.

Everyone wants to be a scholar but there aren't enough field workers. The longer you're out in the field, the more stories you'll hear and miracles you'll see and most likely, be apart of.

 

[rewriter]

Mark 16:15-18
15 And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature.
16 He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.
17 And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues;
18 They shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover.

Please read these passages and share with me where percentages have any room in the text. I'd very much like to understand how that can fit in without it becoming an eisegetical creation. With salvation being the prime mover in these verses, there's no such thing as partially or mostly saved. It's an either-or proposition, as I'm sure we can both agree. So, one either heals those upon whom he laid his hands, or he did not. The demons were cast out entirely, or they were not. The poisons did harm, or they did not. Can we agree with that? If not, please explain why.

MM

Might I ask you to please point out where I cited any of those experiences? As for percentages, what percentage of nonbelievers do you think willfully reject when the HS reaches out to them, or do they lose their free will when faced with the HS, and if they lose their free will, please cite the scripture that supports that. That roughly 90% experience a miracle sounds like good odds to me when there is no indication as to what percentage who have the experience are believers to begin with, the remaining 10% might experience it but deny it as it is outside of what they can explain and do not want to admit such..

 

[Thaddeus]

If it's all one gospel, as some of you claim, then you should be able to do all those things Jesus said, and you can't, so the lack isn't on my part.

Nice try.

MM

As I said, discernment is not head theology. And you have many times been answered

 

[Thaddeus]

You are correct. And, (as an example) that you cannot heal someone who God doesn't want healed. So my stance isn't contrary to the verses you're citing. God gives you power temporarily. It's like, "Go heal Sharon", and for that moment in time, God gives you the power to heal Sharon. But if you walk up to someone named Ted and decide to heal him too, doubtful it will work because God didn't tell you to.

Kathryn Khulman used to call out healings that had taken place of various diseases without even having had contact with the person healed. She said the healings were nothing to do with her, only God.

 

[Delvianna]

Kathryn Khulman used to call out healings that had taken place of various diseases without even having had contact with the person healed. She said the healings were nothing to do with her, only God.

I have a problem with the doctrine of Charismatics. I've seen far too many people get hurt via their "healing" or "deliverance" ministries.

 

[Thaddeus]

I have a problem with the doctrine of Charismatics. I've seen far too many people get hurt via their "healing" or "deliverance" ministries.

That doesnt really address what I wrote. And I was raised Pentecostal, and that gave me many problems

 

[Delvianna]

That doesnt really address what I wrote. And I was raised Pentecostal, and that gave me many problems

It does because Kathryn Khulman is charismatic. Hence my response and why I'm leaving it there.

 

[Thaddeus]

It does because Kathryn Khulman is charismatic. Hence my response and why I'm leaving it there.

Well many got healed in her services, as testified to by physicians who had treated the healed person. And she insisted God must have all the glory, the healings were nothing to do with her. (John7:18)
So God does not have to give someone the power to heal, he can do it without the minister even knowing. I would dispute a person heals anyone, God does it

 

[Delvianna]

Well many got healed in her services, as testified to by physicians who had treated the healed person. And she insisted God must have all the glory, the healings were nothing to do with her. (John7:18)
So God does not have to give someone the power to heal, he can do it without the minister even knowing. I would dispute a person heals anyone, God does it

Of course. Thats the definition of a spiritual gift. No one has power to do anything. But the idea of mass healings at every event is incorrect. Lot of self professed healers being proven as scam artists. Fake people being healed, false testimonies, etc.

 

[Thaddeus]

Of course. Thats the definition of a spiritual gift. No one has power to do anything. But the idea of mass healings at every event is incorrect. Lot of self professed healers being proven as scam artists. Fake people being healed, false testimonies, etc.

Well I have never stated everyone gets healed at services where healings take place. And I know there are some bad examples of charasmatics, but that does not mean every charasmatic must be tarred with the same brush

 

[Delvianna]

Well I have never stated everyone gets healed at services where healings take place. And I know there are some bad examples of charasmatics, but that does not mean every charasmatic must be tarred with the same brush

Every Charismatic holds to the same doctrine, hence the term. So I'm not saying every Charismatic is a scam artist, but I am saying that every Charismatic that claims to heal every person they run across who asks for healing is a liar. Because they're essentially saying they're better than Jesus who didn't even do that.

 

[Thaddeus]

Every Charismatic holds to the same doctrine, hence the term. So I'm not saying every Charismatic is a scam artist, but I am saying that every Charismatic that claims to heal every person they run across who asks for healing is a liar. Because they're essentially saying they're better than Jesus who didn't even do that.

I don't profess to know every charasmatic, but Ive nev er heard of one who claims to have healed everyone they come accross(that does not mean they do not exist, many make fancifull claims whether charasmatic or not)

 

[biblestudent78]

I curious as to why some quickly equate the Gospel to the Word of God. Insights?

 

[frederickdoc]

Did you read the OP and the verses provided, compare and contrast? Most people don't, which is they some continue to assume all the elements are the same, which in fact they are not.

MM

Title says gospels so why not reply to me, as I posted so we can form a foundation ,til then the log spin and one falls in the water

 

[Musicmaster]

As I said, discernment is not head theology. And you have many times been answered

You did answer somewhat...in the affirmative that you don't have faith. I would deal with that if I were you. Please do so.

MM