How do you read the Bible without ET mindset?

[hopeful]

 :goodpost:  Cardinal!

[Transponder]

:goodpost:  Cardinal!

Agreed. I would certainly not agree with treating the bible as some sort of brownie-points task like undertaking to memorize a chapter a month or learning all the begets or reading it through without fail once a year. In whatever way, it should not become a penitence or burden.

[reFORMer]

I would like to hear about the 'god' you have in your head, not so much to debate you out of believing in it, but trying to see how this god-U-know relates to the God and Jesus of the Bible. This is what is intriguing me about the whole 'Bible is not important - faith is' line. Does it leave you with Biblegod or agnostic-god?

I can see it coming - "Well of course it is the JesusGod of the Bible, not because that is the one I was taught about but because that is the true one".

I agree it is a little off-topic so another thread might be a good idea.

I wonder if you understand that being haunted by the ghost of Jesus is what it's all about, not just letters in a book; even so much more, not religious institutions.  Sure, it's supposed to be something also experienced with others, something that is hard to find with just being an audience the common practice.  He is in others, not just me.  And, though some seem to think it is, the Bible is not at odds with the Jesus we experience.  For me, my knowledge of what is written often lags behind what I experience.  Sometimes I've read in it about something new to me that led to my experiencing it.  There is an interplay between the Spirit and the use of the word.  The book can be overdefended, as if belief in it is what's at stake.  While I believe it's authoritative and defendable, it is not God.

To 1.) read, search out and study Scripture; to 2.) engage in various sorts of prayer, directly asking God for Himself; and, to 3.) seek to see and know God in His disciples -- these are common ways of of seeking Jesus to manifest in our lives.  Any of these ways may be degraded or advanced in differing degrees in people who are seeking and finding God.  1.) Statistics in the 1980's indicated less than 5%, maybe as small as 3%, of the population reads anything more than a newspaper or a magazine.  How the computer should figure into it I don't know.  But, a similar statistic holds true for what % of "believers" read the Bible.  They learn a lot of "Bible talk" from one another though.  This begins to explain why all the difference of opinion between "believers."  It isn't because of the source of information, but their ignorance of it that is full of claiming "the Bible says" what really they just heard someone else say.  2.) There usually is far less of any kind of prayer than talk about it.  And 3.) real long term (more than [arbitrarily] 7 years) Christian "community" where all participate without some man in charge is quite rare.

The problem with all of us is our mindset in approaching all of life, not just the Bible.  I'm amazed at how long in my life I've sometimes spent without any experience of God even when I've experienced Him before.  It's not just everybody else out there that's ungodly.  The Spirit will use the Bible to bring about and enhance our encounters with God.

[reFORMer]

 

If Bible reading does not really matter, and the mind has to be rid of 'religion', then what actually is left?

Makes me think of how Christianity did just fine before/without the bible. Now it seems unimaginable to most Christians. Why do you think that is?
blessings,
  - Byron

I was referring to the early church - first 300 years.
  - byron

Following I quote myself from:
Tentmaker Discussion Forum > Member's Section > Christian Life-General > Apocrypha  Reply #4 on: December 16, 2007, 10:35:34 PM
I recommend the book on CD I quote from.  It is about the King James version.  The CD includes the rare entire 8 volumes of Foxe's Book of Martyrs (1563) and more.  Regarding English, the first century Christians brought the gospel and vernacular Scriptures to England and Ireland. (Rom 16:26)

The following is found at the website:  www.avpublications.com and is copied from the chapter previews (very worth reading) from the book In Awe of Thy Word by Gail Riplinger.

The Cambridge History of the Bible states that scriptures were so widely known worldwide that a deacon in the ancient church in Heraclea was "confident that even if all copies of the scriptures should disappear, Christians would be able to rewrite them from memory..."

"It is assumed by writers of the next hundred years that lay people can without difficulty get hold of Bibles for private study, if they will.  'Get books that will be medicine for the soul,' Chrysostom [A.D. 345-407] told his people.  'At least procure the New Testament, the Acts of the Apostles, the Gospels.'  More surprisingly perhaps, in the sixth century, Gaul Caesarius of Arles can press his flock to buy the Bible and read it at home in the dark hours of winter.  He does not appear to anticipate any lack of copies, or that they will be impossibly expensive for the farmer and tradesman" (vol.3, pp. 476-477

Now, again, excerpted from from my reply # 16 on this thread above:
"Concerning what we commonly call the New Testament, (though that really is what is written by the Spirit of God in our hearts and minds) . . . there is no reason not to accept that it was finished being written before 70 AD. and that vernacular versions were written by the apostles themselves before the close of the 1st Century . . . Bibles were very available and in the languages of the people before Constantine.  This was a grassroots hand copied phenomena apart from the false authority by officials usurping the place of the Holy Spirit in the developing bureaucracy of what became Christendom which in turn took early to destroying the vernacular versions, burning them by the cartload, killing many who possessed them as well as those manifesting spiritual gifts.

"Only in the last couple of hundred years, actually mostly in the last 50 to 75 years, do we have to wonder at the motivations of some to change the dates of the N.T. and the vernacular versions to later times."  (Now, new to this post:) This, if true, would make the N.T. not subject to the reactions of eye witnesses, but only the fabrications of a later time and as valid as our fabrications at this much later time.  An example of an appeal to contemporaneous corroboration from Paul's letter to the Romans is:  "After that, he was seen of above five hundred brethren at once; of whom the greater part remain unto this present, but some are fallen asleep." (! Cor 15⁶)  Because the law of Moses forbid the numbering of the people, the 500 mentioned here were all men.  This was about the number of disciples Jesus had.  The true amount of people at this event is 2 or 3 times as many: 1,000 to 1,500 men, women and children.

[firstborn888]

The difference is the selectivity about what one wants to believe and what one doesn't. Hellfire goes out of the window on the basis (it seems) of human logic and the aion thing,ut realy, because it is what you want to believe.
Jesus' resurrection should, on Bible evidence, go out of the window first because there is much more reason to disbelieve that than hellfire. But it doesn't - because you-all want to believe it, I suppose. So that is, I'd guess, another good reason for you not to read the Bible. 

I am supposing, from what I've read of your posts, that you've never had anything supernatural, that is, naturally unexplainable happen to you. Is that correct?
   blessings,
  - Byron

[hopeful]

I agree it is a little off-topic so another thread might be a good idea.

Hi, Trans!   :HeartThrob:

I started a new thread in the Testimonies section.

[gr8wuf]

gr8wuf started off the thread by saying that "I haven't actually read the Bible in a very long time especially since coming to a belief in UR. Why? Well first off I've been set free from the condemnation of not reading the Bible,"

That is not quite saying that freedom from belief in hellfire had led to freedom from religion but rather the odd position that gr8wuf did not care to read the Bible because it did not seem to fit what she now believed.

Just wanted to clarify my original statement. The reason for my lack of reading the Bible was not because "it did not seem to fit what she now believed." I did not mean to make it seem to be for that reason.

The reason is that after coming to a belief in UR, I felt a peculiar freedom from religious activity that I had not known before. There was no longer a "penalty" attached to not reading the Bible. I lived in that freedom without condemnation but also without a desire to delve back into reading the Bible "for any reason." It is just recently that my desire for reading the Bible has returned. But in returning to reading, I noticed how often the ET mindset raised its ugly head. That was simply my question ... how do I get that mindset to settle down? Instead of reading was written, I was "reading into it" what I had been taught.

[gr8wuf]

YOWSERS!

You go away for one little weekend and ... I love discussion. I'm learning so much.

Just a few quick comments:

1. I have the Concordant Literal New Testament and it is very, very helpful. I read from the NIV this weekend and cross-referenced it with the CL. Very helpful.

2. I will be taking a look at the web site links posted.

3.

For me, my knowledge of what is written often lags behind what I experience.

that's exactly where I'm at right now. Trying to get my knowledge to catch up with my experience.

[Cardinal]

 :cloud9: Reformer said, "For me, my knowledge of what is written often lags behind what I experience.  Sometimes I've read in it about something new to me that led to my experiencing it.  There is an interplay between the Spirit and the use of the word."

AMEN and AMEN. You put into words perfectly what I have walked thru.  :thumbsup:

[Transponder]

The difference is the selectivity about what one wants to believe and what one doesn't. Hellfire goes out of the window on the basis (it seems) of human logic and the aion thing,ut realy, because it is what you want to believe.
Jesus' resurrection should, on Bible evidence, go out of the window first because there is much more reason to disbelieve that than hellfire. But it doesn't - because you-all want to believe it, I suppose. So that is, I'd guess, another good reason for you not to read the Bible. 

I am supposing, from what I've read of your posts, that you've never had anything supernatural, that is, naturally unexplainable happen to you. Is that correct?
   blessings,
  - Byron

Correct. But if anything did, or, for that matter, those things that happen to other people, would not suddenly convert me to any particular religion.

Example: I have had the experience of a voice in my head. I am now aware of studies on such voices, but even then, I did not jump to the conclusion that it was an angel or God because I had not the conditioning to do so.   

Neither have I been convinced by miracle healings, gemstones in cremated buddhist monks, preseved bodies, eternal flames or the name of Allah in an aubergine.

[Transponder]

I agree it is a little off-topic so another thread might be a good idea.

Hi, Trans!   :HeartThrob:

I started a new thread in the Testimonies section.

Got it. Thanks, I shall read that.

[Transponder]

gr8wuf started off the thread by saying that "I haven't actually read the Bible in a very long time especially since coming to a belief in UR. Why? Well first off I've been set free from the condemnation of not reading the Bible,"

That is not quite saying that freedom from belief in hellfire had led to freedom from religion but rather the odd position that gr8wuf did not care to read the Bible because it did not seem to fit what she now believed.

Just wanted to clarify my original statement. The reason for my lack of reading the Bible was not because "it did not seem to fit what she now believed." I did not mean to make it seem to be for that reason.

The reason is that after coming to a belief in UR, I felt a peculiar freedom from religious activity that I had not known before. There was no longer a "penalty" attached to not reading the Bible. I lived in that freedom without condemnation but also without a desire to delve back into reading the Bible "for any reason." It is just recently that my desire for reading the Bible has returned. But in returning to reading, I noticed how often the ET mindset raised its ugly head. That was simply my question ... how do I get that mindset to settle down? Instead of reading was written, I was "reading into it" what I had been taught.

Understood. That is why I have observed that UR is halfway to atheism. It is both rejecting a tenet of (official) Christian doctrine because it does not make sense and it has removed the restrictions on thinking for oneself because one no longer believes in an eternal punishment for doing so.

As for ""reading into it" what I had been taught." There is still a lot of that about and that is one of the things I try to question here.

[jabcat]

Hi Trans.  I was glad to see you posting again.  I've followed your posts, and have been posting quite a bit myself lately.  You and I come from very different belief sets, but I have observed your kindness and respectfulness, and that means a lot to me.  We will have no problems communicating, even from such different perspectives.  You remind me a lot of my brother...more details later maybe.

I'd like to briefly respond to a couple of things I've seen you discussing.  First, another perspective wrt to UR being "halfway to atheism" could be described as;  UR is even further away from atheism, because a lot of us believe God is even "bigger", more powerful, and more able than the ET mindset.  That was my realization when God showed UR to me.."He's even bigger and better than I thought"!

Secondly, and briefly, because it's a little off-topic;  my belief is based on God coming to me in such a way that I spiritually recognized Him ..."out of the blue" (although I was being specifically prayed for).  Believe me, I wasn't seeking Him.  And He has continued to be real in my life, in essence, not letting me go, holding me with His stubborn and sufficient grace...anyway, take care, James.

[firstborn888]

The difference is the selectivity about what one wants to believe and what one doesn't. Hellfire goes out of the window on the basis (it seems) of human logic and the aion thing,ut realy, because it is what you want to believe.
Jesus' resurrection should, on Bible evidence, go out of the window first because there is much more reason to disbelieve that than hellfire. But it doesn't - because you-all want to believe it, I suppose. So that is, I'd guess, another good reason for you not to read the Bible. 

I am supposing, from what I've read of your posts, that you've never had anything supernatural, that is, naturally unexplainable happen to you. Is that correct?
   blessings,
  - Byron

Correct. But if anything did, or, for that matter, those things that happen to other people, would not suddenly convert me to any particular religion.

Example: I have had the experience of a voice in my head. I am now aware of studies on such voices, but even then, I did not jump to the conclusion that it was an angel or God because I had not the conditioning to do so.   

Neither have I been convinced by miracle healings, gemstones in cremated buddhist monks, preseved bodies, eternal flames or the name of Allah in an aubergine.

What do mean you're not "convinced by miracle healings"? Have you had or seen one? What if you witnessed such a miracle with your own eyes? How do you think you would react?
- b

[Transponder]

Hi Trans.  I was glad to see you posting again.  I've followed your posts, and have been posting quite a bit myself lately.  You and I come from very different belief sets, but I have observed your kindness and respectfulness, and that means a lot to me.  We will have no problems communicating, even from such different perspectives.  You remind me a lot of my brother...more details later maybe.

I'd like to briefly respond to a couple of things I've seen you discussing.  First, another perspective wrt to UR being "halfway to atheism" could be described as;  UR is even further away from atheism, because a lot of us believe God is even "bigger", more powerful, and more able than the ET mindset.  That was my realization when God showed UR to me.."He's even bigger and better than I thought"!

Secondly, and briefly, because it's a little off-topic;  my belief is based on God coming to me in such a way that I spiritually recognized Him ..."out of the blue" (although I was being specifically prayed for).  Believe me, I wasn't seeking Him.  And He has continued to be real in my life, in essence, not letting me go, holding me with His stubborn and sufficient grace...anyway, take care, James.

In the end, kindness and respectfullness (short of dilution one's arguments for fear of offending someone's beliefs) is very neccessary. For one thing, it makes discussion easier and less stressful.

I have to admit that 'halfway to atheism' was a bit of a sprat  :laughing7: but is valid, about the process of approaching religious doctrine, rather than the nature of God - or god(s).

I understand your point that UR does make God a lot bigger and better than the frankly nasty God of hellfire, punishment and apocalypse. It does, however, make Him, while bigger, a bit more diffuse.

Explain. Read the Bible and see all the nasties. is that God or not? If not, and UR logic is more reliable than mere Holy Writ, then God is ....well, we don't really know what, if the Bible is not reliable. This 'god' is not really the god of the Bible but a more general, unknown god that is the god of all religions, not just of Christianity, or of any of the 'Book' religions. Once one is thinking in terms of a 'god' that Einstein and Darwin would have accepted, then, again, one is halfway to atheism.

[Transponder]

author=Transponder link=topic=2120.msg21854#msg21854 date=1203846515]
The difference is the selectivity about what one wants to believe and what one doesn't. Hellfire goes out of the window on the basis (it seems) of human logic and the aion thing,ut realy, because it is what you want to believe.
Jesus' resurrection should, on Bible evidence, go out of the window first because there is much more reason to disbelieve that than hellfire. But it doesn't - because you-all want to believe it, I suppose. So that is, I'd guess, another good reason for you not to read the Bible. 

I am supposing, from what I've read of your posts, that you've never had anything supernatural, that is, naturally unexplainable happen to you. Is that correct?
   blessings,
  - Byron

Correct. But if anything did, or, for that matter, those things that happen to other people, would not suddenly convert me to any particular religion.

Example: I have had the experience of a voice in my head. I am now aware of studies on such voices, but even then, I did not jump to the conclusion that it was an angel or God because I had not the conditioning to do so.   

Neither have I been convinced by miracle healings, gemstones in cremated buddhist monks, preseved bodies, eternal flames or the name of Allah in an aubergine.

What do mean you're not "convinced by miracle healings"? Have you had or seen one? What if you witnessed such a miracle with your own eyes? How do you think you would react?
- b

What I mean, I suppose, is that I am reserving judgement about the nature and mechanism of miracle healings. I have seen some investigations that involve a lot of suggestion bolstered with mumbo-jumbo; a lot of outright fakery; a lot of presentation of statistics of faith or prayer healings that are not so good when presented in other ways.
I have seen examples of miracle healings that didn't stay healed and  - yes; I have experienced a miracle healing of my own, in a way of speaking (see below).

I also read of a faithhealing effect experienced by Cliff Walker of "positive atheism" magazine. He knows exactly how it was done to him.

I also read the personal miracle of a visitor to the AN website ("Savage" - if you want to look it up) though surprisingly, he deconverted quickly and never referred to this 'miracle' again.

Some have arrived on the AN displaying personal miracles or some they have read or heard of. Some I have followed up but found it impossible to get any real confirmation or details. Others, surprisingly quickly, looked much less convincing when details were forthcoming. So, no, I am not convinced.

I have heard much of the inexplicable healings of the kind where cancers miraculously disappeared and bones regrew. These seem to be of the doubtful confirmation kind, for all that the unquestionable veracity of these stories is oft trumpeted. Neverless, the atheist 'God hates amputees' challenge is still not refuted, so far as I know. 

My own personal miracle was a back that went out (I strained my back in my teens) when I sneezed, of all things, and I could not move. My sister called the doc and just as he arrived, I found I could walk ok. How embarrassing. I hadn't been praying as I was atheist then, as I have been lifelong. I was quite sure it was a mental effect connected with the arrival of the doc, though I can't say more than that.

This experience makes me a bit skeptical of the temporary miracle healings of the ache-alleviation kind.

(sorry - had to tinker the text to get it out of quote - the Curse of the Cyberdunce)
     

[reFORMer]

My mother had been diagnosed at Mayo Clinic with a virtually untreatable degenerative bone disease that was putting her into a wheelchair.  In the 1950's she was healed of it at a tent meeting of the famous American Indian evangelist Orel Roberts.  She says she stood in a line of people several blocks long.  A group of ministers came down the line with Brother Roberts and all they did was touch them and speak the name of "Jesus."  There were cattle truck loads of brace, stretchers and wheelchairs carted away.

I also know by eyewitnesses of the thousands healed in Charles Price's meetings, specifically the one in Minneapolis that lasted for many weeks.  The outcome is still there in the form of a college, Northwestern Bible College, and a large Assembly of God church, I believe it is called Gospel Tabernacle.  There are a number of living participants still available for questioning.  On the night they prayed for goiters and tumors (was it thursdays?) they had to stop a time or two to shovel up these things into a wheelbarrow and cart them out as the people regurgitated them, spitting them out of their mouths.

I posted elsewhere here about fingers growing back on the hand of a fellow when a pastor Reesie (sp?) at Grace Gospel church in Ft. Lauderdale "shouted" at the fingers for about 5 hours.  They have medical papers as well as eyewitnesses.  This was just a few years ago.

These more notable instances are only a beginning of what I could tell.  There are a number of other great healing ministries that emerged in the 1940's and 50's.

[Cardinal]

 :cloud9: That's awesome.  :thumbsup: I believe it because I have seen miracles and been the recipient of 3 myself. Father, we give You praise for Your wonderful works among men!

[Transponder]

My mother had been diagnosed at Mayo Clinic with a virtually untreatable degenerative bone disease that was putting her into a wheelchair.  In the 1950's she was healed of it at a tent meeting of the famous American Indian evangelist Orel Roberts.  She says she stood in a line of people several blocks long.  A group of ministers came down the line with Brother Roberts and all they did was touch them and speak the name of "Jesus."  There were cattle truck loads of brace, stretchers and wheelchairs carted away.

I also know by eyewitnesses of the thousands healed in Charles Price's meetings, specifically the one in Minneapolis that lasted for many weeks.  The outcome is still there in the form of a college, Northwestern Bible College, and a large Assembly of God church, I believe it is called Gospel Tabernacle.  There are a number of living participants still available for questioning.  On the night they prayed for goiters and tumors (was it thursdays?) they had to stop a time or two to shovel up these things into a wheelbarrow and cart them out as the people regurgitated them, spitting them out of their mouths.

I posted elsewhere here about fingers growing back on the hand of a fellow when a pastor Reesie (sp?) at Grace Gospel church in Ft. Lauderdale "shouted" at the fingers for about 5 hours.  They have medical papers as well as eyewitnesses.  This was just a few years ago.

These more notable instances are only a beginning of what I could tell.  There are a number of other great healing ministries that emerged in the 1940's and 50's.

I can only say that, with such conveyor-belt faith - healing factories in operation, one wonders why the hospitals are still in full operation.

It is odd, isn't it, that, with such astounding miracles such as truckloads of tumours and grab-bags of goitres plus fingers re-growing as a minister bawls at them to get their acts together, there seems to be such doubt about whether faith-healing really works? Are the media, science and goverment bodies all so dedicated to covering up the facts that such wonderful answers to the worlds ill have not been investigated, proven and placed at the cutting edge of medcine?

Instead, what we find is investigations into the power of prayer trying to show some sort of statistical significance of the healing of praying patients above those that didn't.

A US pen-pal of mine deconverted from calvinism, mainly when he saw his local minister (who did a lot of healing by prayer) going into a pharmacy. He now has some very harsh things to say about Orel Roberts who he regards as a faker and manipulator of the first order.

And, finally; note my avatar. I am still waiting. I say again; if anyone can turn that water on my desk into wine, I shall believe.

To someone who can cause fingers to be regrown like an octopus, that should be a doddle.

[Cardinal]

 :cloud9: Trans, I have been healed of;1) terminal cancer that had spread to my other organs (within one week of diagnosis after hemorrhaging brought me to the hospital

2) a spinal injury that ruptured 2 discs in my lower back, and 2 in other parts of my spine that paralyzed my left leg sufficient that I could not even bring my firstborn home from the hospital for 11 days, because I couldn't yet walk from the compression of the discs on my sciatic nerve, and

3) a crushed elbow joint from an industrial accident that also would paralyze my hand frequently as the fragments of the joint would rub on the nerve until it swelled and could not function.

ALL of these were documented before and after by stunned, best in their field's, physicians, who themselves, said they had no explanation for what I was telling them, other than the one I offered which was, GOD HEALED ME. In the words of the neurosurgeon who looked at the results of my myllogram, which shows soft tissue damage said, "We couldn't even find any scar tissue where the injury WAS, and that's just not possible!"

And going to a pharmacy had nothing to do with anything. I had miracle healings, yet the Lord has chosen at other times to use doctor's and medicines, and just common sense cures. HE is Lord and He can do whatever He wants anyway He chooses to do it. Remember healing is the children's bread, and most of the time it is not even for the person receiving it, it is for the "little ones" in the faith or lack of it, to see and be converted, as we are living sacrifices. Blessings to you; and the water on your desk may never turn to wine, but I am still convinced the water I'm talking about WILL........ :HeartThrob:

[jenna]

I also believe the water in your bottle won't turn into wine, since for it to do that requires faith on YOUR part, no one here can do that for you.  :2c:

[reFORMer]

I can only say that, with such conveyor-belt faith - healing factories in operation, one wonders why the hospitals are still in full operation.

It is odd, isn't it, that, with such astounding miracles such as truckloads of tumours and grab-bags of goitres plus fingers re-growing as a minister bawls at them to get their acts together, there seems to be such doubt about whether faith-healing really works? Are the media, science and goverment bodies all so dedicated to covering up the facts that such wonderful answers to the worlds ill have not been investigated, proven and placed at the cutting edge of medcine?

Instead, what we find is investigations into the power of prayer trying to show some sort of statistical significance of the healing of praying patients above those that didn't.

A US pen-pal of mine deconverted from calvinism, mainly when he saw his local minister (who did a lot of healing by prayer) going into a pharmacy. He now has some very harsh things to say about Orel Roberts who he regards as a faker and manipulator of the first order.

It seems odd to me how things change by re-naming them.  When Christians refer to getting healed they might use the term "Divine healing."  When debunkers refer to it they call it "faith healing."  When Christians speak of experiencing miracles they speak of "the power of God."  Debunkers speak of "the power of prayer."

The idea that if healing is real, and all the more so if it is mass healings, then surely the hopitals should be emptied, or, "Why don't you go in and just heal everybody in the hospital?"  In the Gospels, when an angel stirred the water at the Pool of Bethesda the first one into the waters was healed.  Why not all the rest?  When Jesus healed the paralytic there, why didn't he heal everybody else at the same time?

As far as responses from those in authority, in Jesus day they sought to kill Lazarus who He'd raised from the dead.  I guess he was an inconvenient truth.  When Jesus healed a man on the sabbath, the religious authorities got together and tried to come up with a plan to destroy him.  Some have an out of touch with reality view of how people react to miracles.  Some of the Popes, sending out armies to crush revival movements, historically illustrate what seems to be like some feel when they see a bug -- squash it.  How about when the Lord healed ten lepers, telling them to go show themselves to the Priest?  Only one came back and thanked him.  Or as Jesus pointed out about the days of Elijah.  There were meny lepers in Israel; but, it was a gentile foreigner who got healed of leprosy.  Even the nations surrounding Elijah knew of him, yet he was an extremely lonely man.  The king of Israel wanted to kill him.  Elijah told them to turn to God and away from their idols.  There was no question the rain had stopped and that they were experiencing a prophesied miraculous famine.  The king called Elijah, "He who troubleth Israel."  They didn't care to heed the word attested to with signs and wonders.  They wanted instead to eliminate the Prophet.  The greater the wonders of God's working displayed to the Pharaoh, the more stubborn he was against God, His prophet and people.

Or somebody who has surely spent no time with Roberts is an expert?  Thousands healed all around the world in the 40'w and 50's!  The athletes at the University he built made quite a showing last year I heard.  And what are you building?  The largest hospital/med school on one foundation in the western world built in the 1900's was built by Roberts; but, of course, he's only a fraud and it's inconsistent to mix medicine and God when healing?  What healing organization with your insights is going around the world holding clinics and prayer, or your version of it?

Too bad some young inexperienced Christians get the same idea you seem to have, that God and medicine don't mix.  A lot of people don't see the whole man, spirit, soul and body.  Greek philosophy is partly to blame for a false dichotomy presented as spirituality for those affected by traditional teaching from Institutional Christianity.  Materialism infects those captured by the priests of Scientism.

You know, those churches in Ft. Lauderdale and Minneapolis are still there and eyewitness accounts are still available, as well at the ORU library.

[Cardinal]

 :cloud9: Reformer, I loved the part about Lazarus being an "inconvenient truth". If there could be such a thing as a "divine understatement", that was IT, LOL......thanks  :thumbsup:

[Transponder]

I also believe the water in your bottle won't turn into wine, since for it to do that requires faith on YOUR part, no one here can do that for you.  :2c:

As good a get  - out as could be needed. Can I assume then that no-one will be praying anymore to God to open Transponder's heart since, without my faith to begin with, it couldn't work. I mean, if God can't turn my water into wine without my believing it first, he certainly can't change my brain.
Or can he?  Is it, in fact, a lot easier to change someone's brain by the sort of preaching and illogic we get here than to accomplish something practical? 

[Transponder]

author=reFORMer
I can only say that, with such conveyor-belt faith - healing factories in operation, one wonders why the hospitals are still in full operation.

It is odd, isn't it, that, with such astounding miracles such as truckloads of tumours and grab-bags of goitres plus fingers re-growing as a minister bawls at them to get their acts together, there seems to be such doubt about whether faith-healing really works? Are the media, science and goverment bodies all so dedicated to covering up the facts that such wonderful answers to the worlds ill have not been investigated, proven and placed at the cutting edge of medcine?

Instead, what we find is investigations into the power of prayer trying to show some sort of statistical significance of the healing of praying patients above those that didn't.

A US pen-pal of mine deconverted from calvinism, mainly when he saw his local minister (who did a lot of healing by prayer) going into a pharmacy. He now has some very harsh things to say about Orel Roberts who he regards as a faker and manipulator of the first order.

It seems odd to me how things change by re-naming them.  When Christians refer to getting healed they might use the term "Divine healing."  When debunkers refer to it they call it "faith healing."  When Christians speak of experiencing miracles they speak of "the power of God."  Debunkers speak of "the power of prayer."

This goes with the territory, I'm afraid. the term 'Divine healing' implies that the effect os due to simething 'divine'. In other words, assuming what is under question. 'Faith healing' is better since (as shown above) it requires faith, whether divine on origin or not. Wouldn't you then agree that faith healing is a more accurate term?

The idea that if healing is real, and all the more so if it is mass healings, then surely the hopitals should be emptied, or, "Why don't you go in and just heal everybody in the hospital?"  In the Gospels, when an angel stirred the water at the Pool of Bethesda the first one into the waters was healed.  Why not all the rest?  When Jesus healed the paralytic there, why didn't he heal everybody else at the same time?

Perhaps because the exhibition healing only needed to be done with one person. Don't you find it odd that none of the other gospel - writers record this healing of a paralytic in Jerusalem? However, they do record the healing of a paralytic in Galilee - but using the same words 'pick up your bed and walk'. Isn't it likely that our evangeliests took a bald statement - claim, rather - that Jesus  told a paralytic to take up his bed and walk and he did. But the Synoptics' source wrote that up as an event in Galilee and John placed it in the settings he knew - Jerusalem. Isn't it clear that the event has to be doubted?

As to the mass healings, your argument is ridiculous, and a deliberate strawman argument. It is not a question of whether everyone is healed or not but that such numbers and regularity of healing  - if true - should surely be proven and accepted even by sceptics that would be trying to find out why.

Without ignoring Cardinal's amazing recoveries from severe illnesses, I still live here in a country where no real evidence of anything other than temporary alleviation (such as happened to my uncle at a faith-healing session) is being adduced.

As far as responses from those in authority, in Jesus day they sought to kill Lazarus who He'd raised from the dead.  I guess he was an inconvenient truth.  When Jesus healed a man on the sabbath, the religious authorities got together and tried to come up with a plan to destroy him.  Some have an out of touch with reality view of how people react to miracles.  Some of the Popes, sending out armies to crush revival movements, historically illustrate what seems to be like some feel when they see a bug -- squash it.  How about when the Lord healed ten lepers, telling them to go show themselves to the Priest?  Only one came back and thanked him.  Or as Jesus pointed out about the days of Elijah.  There were meny lepers in Israel; but, it was a gentile foreigner who got healed of leprosy.  Even the nations surrounding Elijah knew of him, yet he was an extremely lonely man.  The king of Israel wanted to kill him.  Elijah told them to turn to God and away from their idols.  There was no question the rain had stopped and that they were experiencing a prophesied miraculous famine.  The king called Elijah, "He who troubleth Israel."  They didn't care to heed the word attested to with signs and wonders.  They wanted instead to eliminate the Prophet.  The greater the wonders of God's working displayed to the Pharaoh, the more stubborn he was against God, His prophet and people.

Still believing the stuff in the Bible? If Lazarus was really raised from the dead, how is it that the synoptics don't mention this amazing proof? If it did happen, it had to be a faked miracle, arranged beforehand, because Mary and Martha knew where Jesus was and where to send a message. The Bible is proof of Nothing.

Or somebody who has surely spent no time with Roberts is an expert?  Thousands healed all around the world in the 40'w and 50's!  The athletes at the University he built made quite a showing last year I heard.  And what are you building?  The largest hospital/med school on one foundation in the western world built in the 1900's was built by Roberts; but, of course, he's only a fraud and it's inconsistent to mix medicine and God when healing?  What healing organization with your insights is going around the world holding clinics and prayer, or your version of it?

Nice try. Unless I am personally involved I am not qualified to speak. However, I am in touch with someone who was very much in touch with Oral Roberts, and I quote:

"For starters, you can mention to the Oral supporters and defenders that he claimed to raise the dead. See if they're gullible enough to believe that he really did, or if they'll admit that perhaps he was exaggerating/lying.
You can also tell (them) that Oral ending up selling his City of Faith hospital to a corporation after it lost too much money, and that the *** should have returned all the contributions people made to save the hospital after Oral allegedly saw the 900-foot-tall Jesus towering above the hospital. But of course, the ***** didn't return a penny. It wasn't long before he left Oklahoma for California, to live a very lavish lifestyle".

Too bad some young inexperienced Christians get the same idea you seem to have, that God and medicine don't mix.  A lot of people don't see the whole man, spirit, soul and body.  Greek philosophy is partly to blame for a false dichotomy presented as spirituality for those affected by traditional teaching from Institutional Christianity.  Materialism infects those captured by the priests of Scientism.

I gather that the Oral Roberts funded hospital uses a combination of regular medicine and faith. The medicine does the curing; Faith gets the credit.

You know, those churches in Ft. Lauderdale and Minneapolis are still there and eyewitness accounts are still available, as well at the ORU library.

You mean such events are just filed away in the library? They are not happening today?

Look, I won't discount inexplicable healings, though I have never seen any. I have heard of wonderful healings at Lourdes, but  study showed them to be rather low statistically and not of the stump-regrowing kind. If I did come across a place where people really got cured of severe illness, or regrew arms on a regular and provable basis, I would be interested. But the fact is that such evidence is not forthcoming and that is only possible if the media is suppressing such obvious facts or the matter is being exaggurated in the interests in talking me over.