I just read a devotion that can be like a good smack upside the head:
It stated that religion is dangerous and would rather debate an issue than do something about it. They said we shouldn't get you sidetracked into a religious debate or get all hung up on theological questions. That the difference between religion and the love of God is that religion argues while love acts.
Replies are closed for this discussion.
I'll read this in a moment after I ask the Lord to truly cover me in His presence before I read anything from Kenneth Copeland
The writer maybe?
Religion would rather debate about healing than see someone healed. Religion would rather argue about deliverance than see someone set free.
This is off IMO. While it is true that there are those who debate the whole teaching of healing in its widest understanding from colds to cancer, from eyesight to hearing, and those who debate deliverance. For the most part, and this is not a religion argument, the question is whether a child of God who is indwelt with the Holy Spirit can also be indwelt by a demonic spirit.
There are several things to consider.
1) How does a particular ministry, or person, perceive a demonic spirit. Some believe that every problem in life is caused by evil spirits and teach the need to exercise those spirits in order to have victory in life. There are those who believe that the child of God can be possessed when they "invite" an evil spirit in by certain actions. There are others, but I will add one more. There are those who do not believe a child of God who has been transformed and indwelt can be possessed by an evil spirit (this is where I am). Most in this latter group recognize that one can be oppressed by evil spirits, but that is far different than seeing a person foaming at the mouth and acting crazy as the man who they attempted to chain, or the child who under the influence of an evil spirit threw himself into the fire.
2) Often the woman used in this article is set up as an example of a child of God being bound by Satan (does not actually eve say she was possessed, but we will assume she was and it was not oppression), but that is not the case at all. There are no born again Christians transformed and indwelt with the Holy Spirit at the time of these events. Jesus had not died and rose again. The disciples had not been breathed on and told to receive the Holy Spirit ... all of which came after the resurrection. Even based on the text all we know about her is that she is a Hebrew and Paul tells us in Romans 11 that not all Jews will be saved.
3) What does Scripture reveal? Is there one case of a person being possessed by an evil spirit who is recognized as a child of God during the possession? If demon possession was simply caused by an open door then the church in Corinth would have been overrun by demonically possessed people instead of being largely populated by disobedient or ignorant children of God, but there is no mention in Paul's letters to the church in Corinth regarding exercising a demon, even when referring tot he man who they were told to hand over to Satan ... not cast out a demon.
4) Much, and I emphasize MUCH, damage can be, and has been, caused by people attempting to exercise demons that were not there. Not to long ago deliverance was the latest fad in Christianity with groups popping up looking for demons behind every problem and telling people that they are demonically possessed. Acts 19 is always a great place to look as we see the actions and results of the seven sons of Sceva.
Lastly, I guess there are some who might debate over the location of the demon in an actually possessed person ... though I have no idea why that would be important, nor have I ever met a person concerned with the location ... to the exception of some of the ministries that focus on there being an evil spirit behind almost every thing (i.e. spirit of alcoholism, spirit of drug abuse, spirit of anger, spirit of cancer, etc)
We will have to disagree on the context and the point of the article. He ties it specifically to the topic of demon possession making it a center point of the article. Thus, the article is not just about the fact that they should have helped ... he could have selected the "Good Samaritan" for that article.
It is important to understand what you are dealing with before you act. Somethings are easy to discern while others require more time to be sure so that one may act in a way that seeks to solve the problem. Is it mental illness or a demon is one example from today. We need to be sure before we would attempt to respond noting he is not talking about simply praying for someone, but actually releasing them from bondage.
Something for you to investigate. Search out his ministry and seek to understand what he really means by the following two statements if you want to noting especially the underlined part:
1) Those very same religious leaders who criticized Jesus for healing on the Sabbath could have ministered healing to that woman themselves on any of the other six days of the week if they’d cared enough to do it.
2) They had the same covenant of Abraham that Jesus was ministering on.
I seriously doubt you'll find anything you couldn't agree with in this one. - oops. lol Found one. Wellllll, I actually found a couple of things. Just going to do this one first though.
Those very same religious leaders who criticized Jesus for healing on the Sabbath could have ministered healing to that woman themselves on any of the other six days of the week if they’d cared enough to do it. That’s why Jesus was so indignant with them. They had the same covenant of Abraham that Jesus was ministering on. But their religion had kept that woman bound instead of setting her free. It always does. But could they really? At one time, these same leaders trusted God, He spoke to them, used them & He used them to lead His chosen. But at some point, they abandoned their calling for what? Money, government, status, power, many houses? Instead of being what they were anointed to be, they had traded it for what? The world. A sad faded memory of the greatness that God had once used to show His divine glory.
In Jeremiah’s time, He sent the prophet to the temple gate to rebuke them. He offered them another chance. But, as always, they wouldn’t hear him or consider what he had to say. Jeremiah 7:27-29 says “When you tell them all this, they will not listen to you; when you call to them, they will not answer. 28 Therefore say to them, ‘This is the nation that has not obeyed the Lord its God or responded to correction. Truth has perished; it has vanished from their lips.
29 “‘Cut off your hair and throw it away; take up a lament on the barren heights, for the Lord has rejected and abandoned this generation that is under his wrath.
Fast forward to Christ. He came inviting, calling to the sick, blind, poor and lost to be under His protection. Matthew 23:37 says Jerusalem, Jerusalem, you who kill the prophets and stone those sent to you, how often I have longed to gather your children together, as a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, and you were not willing.” They could find healing & forgiveness but they were not willing!!!
Matthew goes on to say 38 See! Your house is left to you desolate; 39 for I say to you, you shall see Me no more till you say, ‘Blessed is He who comes in the name of the Lord!’ His glory & presence had left it. The remainder of their religious life would be conducted without God’s presence. Their work was turned over to the flesh. Their deeds were dead & their works were for the sight of humans.
The shepherds would no longer be spiritual men, but ministers of flesh.
Love how David Wilkerson said it. Think of it: here stood mercy and grace Incarnate, saying, "This old thing isn't mine anymore. I now leave it utterly desolate. It has absolutely no chance of being revived." Then Jesus moved on to Pentecost, to the beginning of a new thing. He was about to raise up a new church, not a replica of the old. And he would make it brand-new from the foundation up. It would be a church of new priests and people, all born again in him.
Meanwhile, the old work would drag on. Crowds would still come to the temple to observe their dead rituals. Shepherds would still rob the poor, adulterers would sin at will, and people would drift into idolatry. Each day, the old work would grow increasingly dry and weak. Why, you ask? God's presence was no longer in it.
They couldn't have ministered this healing. They didn't have the power any longer. They released that power to the god of this world to obtain momentary distractions.
"I'm the same on preachers, I listen for the parts that are useable and I overlook what doesn't set right with what I believe. Granted it has caused issues where I had not yet solidified a belief and struggled with who was teaching the truth, but as my mind has settled in a lot of areas, I have a greater ability to pull good from a message. I'm always trying to see whatsoever is lovely whatsoever is of good report if there be any virtue...
I guess it's why I find value in all of them.
However granted there are some whom have not preached one message that appealed to me. "
Okay, I'm going to be the sourpuss....I would not listen one iota to anyone's message that didn't have the full message and Truth.
Acts 17:11--Now these were more noble-minded than those in Thessalonica, for they received the word with great eagerness, examining the Scriptures daily to see whether these things were so.
We need to be very careful to those we are listening to...discernment is so very important in these days and times. Just because they are messages that make us "feel good" doesn't mean the message is good.
This is not about us, how we feel when listening.
So...are you suggesting that I should sit under this ministries teachings and listen?
I know this ministry and what it teaches and I will flee fast and hard away from it.
(Galatians 1:8; Jeremiah 23:16; Romans 16:17; 2 Cor. 11:14; Galatians 1:9; 1 Tim. 1:19, 20; Matthew 25:41)
And I'm a bit surprised at why you are surprised. :) Obviously in my statement....
"I would not listen one iota to anyone's message that didn't have the full message and Truth. "
it caused confusion, perhaps? I do not believe that anyone would make a statement like that without investigating first and by your just kidding....about me having some kind of pre-knowledge, etc., that you might understand my intent in the above statement, but chose to choose semantics instead of understanding my opposition to any ministry that would deceive anyone. Or perhaps I have that wrong as well and if I do, my apologies.
As we all know there are certain ministries that we are all opposed to, because their error is, in effect, quite obvious. The one's that concern me, are those that aren't so obvious, simple nuances, distortions, adding to, or taking away, or perversions of the text of the Bible, the one's that have truth mixed with just enough error to make it damning.
Might I be too serious about this...I would say no, but I'm sure that there will be those who disagree.
I didn't think you were an advocate for those ministries when I read your post to LT.
"Do some people posses the ability to speak from the Holy Spirit without having full command of the words within scripture(Bible). "
Could you please expound on this question?
But I will tell you that I believe that Spiritual gifts will be according to the guidelines given to us within the Word.