| Author | Message | ||
| U2bsda Registered user Username: U2bsda Post Number: 44 Registered: 11-2004 |
Another question  If a church does a practice that cannot be found in the Bible is it inheritantly wrong? Or should we look at the practice in light of the fruit that comes out of it? | ||
| Bobj Registered user Username: Bobj Post Number: 42 Registered: 1-2006  |
Hi U2 Are you asking if the ends justify the means? I think strict discipline in churches (and homes)can backfire, and that well-meaning church leaders can really mess with people's heads by linking salvation to conformity with their self-made rules and practices. I think that people can conform (and I think kids do this) to save their skin, but inside they remain frustrated and rebellious against what they perceive to be authority based on false premises. Eventually the mask falls off. What a great question! I assume you are also asking about the misuse of authority. I will be interested in the responses you get to this thread! | ||
| U2bsda Registered user Username: U2bsda Post Number: 45 Registered: 11-2004 |
Thanks Bobj for your comments. Not so much the misuse of authority, but in general if Church A does X and Church B, C, and D don't do the x because they don't see it in the Bible. But the x that Church A does produces good fruit. Now Church E also does X, but there is no good fruit from it. Would you say to not do X because it is not found in the Bible or would you only do x if good fruit came from it? That sounds a little jumbled, but does it make sense? | ||
| Melissa Registered user Username: Melissa Post Number: 1419 Registered: 7-2003 |
If you believe what you are doing is from God, I think you're going to produce fruit. If what you are doing is following some manmade program that God gave to one group that works well, but then try to reproduce it systematically and expect the same results, I think you've forgotten the most important element..."from God". I think God can and does use many different things not specifically defined in scripture. But when we take our eyes off the reason we're doing what we're doing, and start looking at the results, things can get skewed. So, in and of itself, I see no problem with using anything as God might lead, so long as there is no conflict. But expecting certain results for following a program without God's leading is chance.... | ||
| Bobj Registered user Username: Bobj Post Number: 43 Registered: 1-2006 |
Hi U2 Deuteronomy 18:20-22 says that a prophet that presumes to speak in my name anything I have not commanded him to say . . . must be put to death. Obviously, authority must be valid. In Acts 15, the new Christian church is considering whether the Law of Moses must be imposed on new believers. This was bad news. Peter, who had lived the first part of his life under the old covenant law and knew firsthand how impossible it was, stood and said in v 10,"Now then, why do you test God by putting on the necks of the disciples a yoke that neither we nor our forefathers have been able to bear? No! we believe that it is through the grace of our Lord Jesus that we are saved, just as they are." Putting God to the test was code for "watch it, dude, you may not live to the end of the day." There was no way that he was going to allow Christians to be in bondage to the 10 or the 613! v 12 This really got the attention of the assembly, and they grew silent and listened. . . v 19 Here they decided that "we should not make it difficult for the Gentiles . . ." Other versions suggest terms like "lay no greater burden on them" etc. The whole idea was to avoid laying needless rules on Christians. In v 28 the authority of the apostles and the authority of the Holy Spirit are confirmed in this decision not to lay the Law of Moses on Christians. I apologize for being so blunt, but this is the Spirit of God saying this, and churches better be careful when linking their rules to salvation! Praise God! The rules for Christians were simple: avoid the occult (blood was a symbol) strangled meat (probably for health or cultural reasons, I'm not sure) and sexual immorality. When my friends hammer me with the 10, I sometimes remind that such views are not necessarly Christian acording to Acts 15. I know it's not very nice, but it's right out of the Bible. Basically, the scriptures take a pretty dim view of unnecessary rules. To be honest, I don't know quite how to respond to your last post, but maybe others can give a better response. Bob | ||
| Honestwitness Registered user Username: Honestwitness Post Number: 87 Registered: 7-2005  |
The Roman Catholic practice of confessing your sins to a priest has some basis in Scripture, but I believe it's misapplied. Just because we find something in Scripture, we shouldn't necessarily make it a church practice. On the other hand, the practice of doing responsive readings is not necessarily commanded in Scripture, but I personally believe it produces good fruit. | ||
| U2bsda Registered user Username: U2bsda Post Number: 46 Registered: 11-2004 |
Thank you for your responses I'm not actually talking about a rule or anything tied to salvation, but something one church does in services that another church does not do. The activity that the one church does is not found in the Bible at all, but good fruit can come out of it. | ||
| Deadmanwalking Registered user Username: Deadmanwalking Post Number: 27 Registered: 4-2006  |
Let me relate a little of my experience in the hope that it may help. For a couple of years I attended a Four Square church where the preaching was Gospel centered and Biblical. (That may not be true for all Four Square congregations) Speaking in tongues and the charismatic phenomenon of ěbeing slain in the Spiritî were both part of their practice and were encouraged. While speaking in tongues can be supported Biblically, the practice of being slain in the Sprit is more difficult to directly support. During my time there I saw much good fruit produced in that congregation. I also have experience, through my family, of a different Pentecostal church of another denomination where the same practices were part of their worship. This particular group has had all kinds of horrible sin in its leadership and congregation. It seems to cycle from bad to worse every few years and many people have been hurt. That particular church canít seem to get out of the cycle and I see bad fruit from it. In the first church I mentioned, I witnessed many people whose walk with God was strengthened and more focused by the practices Iíve mentioned. In the second church those same practices have been the tools used to coerce more than one person into adultery. I believe the good fruit that was produced was a result of the Biblical preaching and gospel focus rather than the charismatic practices. I currently attend a church that does not believe in infant baptism. However, I often visit a PCA church that does. Both these churches are rock solid on the Gospel and Biblically sound on the essential doctrines. Until God leads me into a clearer understanding and belief on both being slain in the Spirit and infant baptism, I will continue to make my decisions on these things based on whether or not they get in the way of the Gospel. I encourage you to study and pray over the things that concern you, God is faithful to lead you! Even if you make mistakes in judgment, and you probably will, He is rich in mercy and promises that if we earnestly seek Him we will find Him. Soli Deo Gloria, Richard | ||
| U2bsda Registered user Username: U2bsda Post Number: 47 Registered: 11-2004 |
Thanks Deadmanwalking! I have heard that being slain in the Spirit is not specificaly in the Bible, but people are usually slain in the Spirit after the laying on of hands. Laying on of hands is in the Bible though so would that make the slain in the Spirit biblical? | ||
| Riverfonz Registered user Username: Riverfonz Post Number: 1893 Registered: 3-2005 |
Our PCA pastor last Sunday had a great take on the "slain in the spirit" doctrine. He said "the only place I can find any Biblical support for being 'slain in the spirit' is in Acts 5 where Ananias and Sapphira were slain in the spirit when they lied to the Holy Spirit". So when Benny Hinn puts his ring-studded fingers and hands on someone's forehead, you can be sure that when they go down to the floor, they are being slain by emotionalism and the power of suggestion. There has never been one documented medical healing at a Benny Hinn service that I am aware of. Stan | ||
| U2bsda Registered user Username: U2bsda Post Number: 49 Registered: 11-2004 |
Slain in the Spirit is not actually being "slain in the Spirit" like Ananias and Sapphira. Perhaps, a more accurate term is falling down under the power of God. I can attest to this being real and not happening because of emotionalism and the power of suggestion. I realize the emotionalism and the power of suggestion does happen though. For those who have never experienced falling under the power of God it isn't just falling backwards - it is more like your legs turn to noodles and you are on the floor. The first time I went up to have hands laid on me was while I still considered myself SDA. I was very nervous, but felt God leading me to do that. I went up to have hands laid on me to impart into me a passion for souls. I braced myself when the preacher laid his hands on me and I didn't fall at all (I didn't even come close), but I did receive that passion for souls which is the cataylst that led me out of the SDA church. I couldn't stay in a church who had the mission to reach other Christians. The next time I went up my body hit the floor and I totally didn't expect it so there was no power of suggestion there. BTW, while I don't agree with alot of Benny Hinn's theology or all he does, he does get a bad wrap. He never claims that he heals anyone, but takes people's testimonys and gives the praise to God when people say they are healed. You can see testimonies of medical healings here: http://www.bennyhinn.org/yourlife/Healing-Healing-Testimony.html While I don't agree with everything he does, I do admire him for continuing on in spite of the tremendous persecution he and his family has faced because of his popularity. | ||
| Deadmanwalking Registered user Username: Deadmanwalking Post Number: 28 Registered: 4-2006 |
I've heard all the arguments claiming that being slain in the Spirit has Biblical foundations. I cannot see that support, even as a result of laying on of hands. In the Bible all the cases of being struck down or prostrated before God seem to be totally different in experience as well as physical description. So, no I would not consider the practice Biblical. From my own personal experience I have come to see it as an emotional phenomenon. As such I see it as potentially dangerous. I've seen it used to great harm in the congregation I mentioned above. Stan is right in his assessment above. I do not believe that the spirit at work in folks like Benny Hinn is the Holy Spirit. What I'm saying is that as an emotional experience it may not be wrong in its self. Just as any emotional experience is not inherently right or wrong. I do see it as a very dangerous thing especially when used as a spiritual experience, particularly because of its relational aspect. When we experience an emotional event so powerful that we lose consciousness and control of our bodies, and it happens in the context of powerful input, and stimuli from other people we place ourselves on, at best, dangerous ground. | ||
| Deadmanwalking Registered user Username: Deadmanwalking Post Number: 29 Registered: 4-2006 |
I hope people much wiser than I will speak to this issue. | ||
| U2bsda Registered user Username: U2bsda Post Number: 50 Registered: 11-2004 |
Why does supernatural equal dangerous? If Benny Hinn was of the devil wouldn't the devil be working against himself? | ||
| Honestwitness Registered user Username: Honestwitness Post Number: 91 Registered: 7-2005 |
Supernatural means beyond natural. We are surrounded by supernatural happenings all the time. If God is for us, who can be against us? I do not fear supernatural things, because 'greater is He that is in me than he that is in the world.' I would be very cautious in ascribing anything supernatural to the devil, especially if it is being done in the name of Jesus. God has chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise. Remember when the prophet walked around in his underwear? Remember the prophet who laid on his side for many days and cooked his food over a fire fueled by human dung? These men looked pretty foolish. Remember when David danced before the ark and his wife got all offended? David must have looked pretty foolish. And yet, it was the Holy Spirit who was the author of David's actions. Remember Revelation 1:17, where John 'fell at his feet as dead' when confronted by God? I believe we have plenty of Scriptural backing for supernatural happenings being authored by God. Please consider this question. What if I claim that a supernatural happening is authored by God, and give Him all the glory for it, but find out, when I sit at Jesusí feet in heaven, that I was wrong? Because, you know, the only One who really knows the answer to that is God himself. What if God tells me it was really Satan who authored that healing or caused that person to fall as though dead? God can certainly set me straight, and I'm sure he will. But in the meantime, God received the glory and the praise for the healing or the spiritual experience of the seeker! I do not pity Satan that he did not! On the other hand, what if I claim that a supernatural happening is authored by Satan, and give him the credit, but find out later that I was wrong? Because, you know, God it the only One who really knows. What if God tells me it was really He who authored the healing or the slain-in-the-spirit experience? What have I done? Satan received the glory and praise for something God did! I feel that result would be much, much worse than giving God the glory for something good that might possibly have been a satanic counterfeit. Honestwitness (Message edited by honestwitness on July 15, 2006) | ||
| Riverfonz Registered user Username: Riverfonz Post Number: 1896 Registered: 3-2005 |
U2bsda, I don't mean to offend in any way, but there are some deep concerns we should all have as former SDAs, and that is getting rid of one false prophet and trading her for another false teacher. What if I could show you that Benny Hinn has documented false prophecies? If I could show you where he made a prophecy that didn't come to pass, would you hold him in the same category as Ellen White? And before I would say that Benny Hinn has been persecuted, are you aware that he owns a ten million dollar home? He pays his son's girlfriend 5,000 dollars per night to babysit while one of his crusades are being conducted. It sounds like he is persecuted all the way to the bank. Since I am a practicing physician, I am aware of a Christian physician who has thoroughly investigated Benny Hinn's claims that God has healed through Hinn's ministry. Sadly, these claims cannot be substantiated. Many people have been duped and deceived into thinking they would get healing through this man's ministry. Benny Hinn is part of the false gospel of "name it and claim it" where it makes God out to be some cosmic Santa Claus or vending machine. So many of these types of preachers are on TBN and they are just fleecing the flock of God. T.D. Jakes who is a part of this movement denies the basic Christian doctrine of the Trinity. Here is just one link documenting the false prophecies and false teachings of Benny Hinn: http://www.deceptioninthechurch.com/bhinn.html One of his most outrageous prophecies is that Jesus Christ will actually appear in person again even before His second coming. Ellen White claimed 100 personal visits of Christ to her. So, if Benny hinn claims the same thing, then why would we respect Benny hinn more than Ellen White? Stan | ||
| U2bsda Registered user Username: U2bsda Post Number: 51 Registered: 11-2004 |
Honestwitness, Thank you for sharing! I've found that many people have received Christ after seeing a miracle. Stan, I do not follow Benny Hinn and do not agree with much of his theology, but I do not see the power of Satan at all. Benny Hinn never claims that he heals anyone. People come expectantly to his meetings and it is their faith in God that heals them. What is it to me if he has a 10 million dollar home? Why should we be concerned with how much money he has? I recently saw a documentary on a boy who said he had the power to heal through changing a person's energy. He charged $99 a head with no results. Benny Hinn does not charge for his meetings. People give freely to his ministry. If the board decides he should receive a large salary then that is up to them. I'm sure he probably needs a lot of security and body guards because many Christians hate him. I am familiar with "name it and claim it" and also familiar with the criticism. Why do you call it a false gospel? What do you consider the Gospel to be? I see no differece in the "name it and claim it" crowd and other Christians when it comes to the Gospel. The only difference I see is that that "name it and claim it" crowd believes they are already victorious over the works of the devil. | ||
| Raven Registered user Username: Raven Post Number: 513 Registered: 7-2004  |
Good link you posted, Stan. On that site I found another link that gives specific examples of the falseness of Benny Hinn: http://www.rapidnet.com/~jbeard/bdm/exposes/hinn/general.htm If the report is accurate (I've never watched or read anything from Benny Hinn) he sure throws out curses left and right to anyone who would dare speak against him or question his "gift." Sounds a lot like EGW's scathing rebuke to any who would dare question her "gift." The article does a good job of pointing out that we are instructed to "test the spirit"
And also, the article further points out that miracles can be counterfeited. Just becomes someone says "Lord, Lord" doesn't mean they belong to Jesus.
I'm not trying to judge anyone's personal experiences, but when someone is a public figure claiming to be an instrument for God of such magnitude, certainly they more than anyone deserve our most careful "testing." | ||
| Jeremy Registered user Username: Jeremy Post Number: 1406 Registered: 10-2004  |
Here is an informative article about Benny Hinn, showing that he teaches Tritheism and a Gnostic "Jesus," just like EGW/SDA does: http://www.modernreformation.org/krhinn.htm Stan, I do think that both EGW and Hinn are false prophets, but I do have to say that the salvation page on Hinn's website appears to present the gospel (or at least very close to it) on the surface, and I have not seen any statement like that by itself in EGW's writings that is so Gospel-sounding without adding in works in following sentences. Here is the link: http://www.bennyhinn.org/salvation/salvation2.cfm That is Benny Hinn's main salvation message page on his website. When I saw that link awhile back, it kind of baffled me. I'd like to get your thoughts on it, Stan. If we were to see that page on someone else's website, would we call it a false gospel? Reading other things from him though, he clearly preaches a false gospel elsewhere. Jeremy | ||
| Ric_b Registered user Username: Ric_b Post Number: 578 Registered: 7-2004  |
Jeremy, isn't what you are describing with Benny Hinn so similar to what we find in SDAism. When we look at the public face that they try to put forward the errors are hard to find and they sound exceptionally mainstream. But when we scratch beneath the surface, the serious errors start to show. You mention that the promotional piece on Hinn's website sounds fine, but when you read other statements the errors become apparent. The similarity to SDAism is eerie. |
