Cleansing the Charismatic Crackup, Final Thoughts
August 21, 2008
Posted by Dan Edelen in : Cerulean Sanctum Series, Charismatic, Christianity Outside North America, Christianity in North America, Church Issues, Discernment, Dying to Self, Godly Character, Holiness, Humility, In the News, Leadership, Maturity, Notable Christians, Oddities, Relevance, Revival, Supernaturalism Functions : Trackback,
Print This Post
,
Email This Post
Over the last few days, thousands of people have come to Cerulean Sanctum looking for answers concerning the meltdown in the charismatic movement in light of what happened at Lakeland. People are searching. They want answers and reassurance.
Here is the word that I have for them. It comes from a prophet who did no miracles but was called the greatest by the One who truly matters:
“He must increase, but I must decrease.”
—John 3:30
John the Baptist said this in context of knowing his ministry was not what mattered in the end. He said it because he knew he was being surpassed, because he understood his place was to shine the light on the Lord and not himself. His curtain had risen, but now it was falling. And John rejoiced in that.
Because John was, above all else, humble.
I do some of my best reflecting in the shower. Something about being alone and naked brings clarity. It’s quiet and peaceful. The whispered voice of God stirs among the waters. Or something like that. Whatever the case, my morning shower has been the birthplace for many a post here.
During Tuesday’s shower the word that God dropped into my heart was humility.
If we are to clean up the mess within the contemporary charismatic movement, above all else, we need to rediscover humility.
We need leaders who have been tested by the twin crucibles of time and tragedy. It’s those folks who speak softly who often possess the most wisdom, but among the noisy clamor of the modern charismatic scene we have drowned them out. We have ignored them because they are not flashy, hip, or “charismatic” in the other sense of the word.
I believe they are the ones who must rise up at this time in history.
We need people who understand the grace of God. People who, like Job, can stand before God and put their hands over their mouths because they understand that they are nothing in the presence of God. Yet that same God offers them mercy because they realize they are dust before Him.
We need people in the charismatic movement who, again like Job, are so concerned with the holiness of God and our tendency as fallen creatures toward sin that they make sacrifices on behalf of others who may have sinned so as to ensure that God has not been slighted. Fostering that kind of mentality will stifle excess before it has a chance to poison others.
I believe that charismatics need to stop promoting those people to leadership positions because of the force of their personalities or the novelty of their ministries. 
Instead, we need to seek out those who would otherwise have been forgotten, those who are not shameless self-promoters, but promoters of Jesus Christ. In other words, humble servants.
Do we remember the word servant ? Is it still in our vocabulary? Find me a servant who is dedicated to pouring herself out and who finds her filling not before adoring crowds but before God alone in her prayer closet and I’ll show you someone ready to lead.
Do we understand humility? Have we seen any signs around us that it still exists? Give me a man who would rather be wrong before millions of people than besmirch the character and name of Jesus Christ and I’ll show you a man worthy of his calling.
But where are those people in the charismatic movement in the West?
I see their counterparts in the East every Sunday in my church. We support a number of native missionaries in Asia through Gospel for Asia, a charismatic missionary organization. Their pictures line the wall outside the sanctuary. For the most part, these are poor people who have nothing but their names written in the Lamb’s Book of Life. They live for Jesus alone. They are nameless, faceless people who have counted the cost and know that He is worthy even as they are not. They are the reason that the Gospel goes forth in power in developing countries even as we in the West flock to the next dog and pony show looking for the next spiritual fix.
They are people who understand that He must increase while they must decrease.
I used to meet people like that here in the States. Not so much anymore, though. Most of us have our own agendas. We squeeze the Lord in when we can, but it’s still mostly about us, about our families, about getting ahead in life.
When I told my Dad that I was going to go into ministry full time, he said something I will never forget: “Then prepare to be poor because you won’t get anywhere in life.” Ouch, right?
Still, that kind of statement doesn’t make humble people flinch because they know their treasure is in heaven, not on earth.
Have we American charismatics counted the cost? A quick look around would answer that question, and not in the positive. We are a proud, selfish people who look down on the publican beating his breast and say, “Thank you, Lord, that I am not like that sinner.”
The problem is we are like that sinner. We’re just not humble enough to admit it.
***
In closing, I wish to offer a few links to other sites with good words concerning the charismatic movement and what can be done to prevent further damage and how we might repair the broken down walls before us:
I like so much of what Frank Viola writes. He has many good thoughts here.
John Piper wades into the mess with his usual sense and sensibility.
Dr. Harold Bussell contributes some excellent thoughts on the evangelical susceptibility to being lured into cults and cult-like activities. Good warnings and wisdom here. In addition, he takes a look at authority issues as well, something that most charismatics need to heed, especially as everyone goes nuts over “coverings.”
On this issue of humility, the best book I have read on the topic comes from Andrew Murray, the South African pastor who oversaw a great revival in that nation during the 19th century. Murray reads like a kinder, gentler Jonathan Edwards, sharing many experiences with Edward’s own during the Great Awakening. Murray, an amazingly prolific author, should be required reading for all charismatics as far as I am concerned. To our great fortune, Murray’s book on humility is online in its entirety.
I mentioned Watchman Nee’s book The Latent Power of the Soul in a previous post in this series. Fortunately, that book, too, is online in its entirety. We can learn much from Nee’s understand of soulish power versus genuine Holy Spirit power. I suspect that if we stripped soulish power out of the contemporary charismatic movement very little Holy Spirit power would be left. And that should alarm us.
Rob McAlpine discusses what it means to be “postcharismatic.” (I believe, though, that it might be better to think of reform as being “precharismatic”. Also, in a case of horrid timing, it seems McAlpine’s publisher in Canada is forgoing releasing his book here in the U.S. on postcharismatic thought. I would think this would be the perfect opportunity to ride the wave of confusion concerning this blowup within the charismatic movement.)
(Hat tips go to many people, some of whom I owe an apology because I have misplaced their names as sources. Bill Kinnon, though, had several good links at his site.)
Posts in the “Cleansing the Charismatic Crackup” series:
Dan,
As I was reading the first part of today’s post, talking about humility, I started thinking about how the real advances in spreading the gospel are happening in Latin America, India, China, and other economically underdeveloped areas, where the people don’t have much material wealth, so they put their trust completely in God instead of their bank account or government. Then further down, you hit on that same thought when you mentioned Gospel for Asia.
One thing that worries me, though, is that these countries won’t lag far behind the U.S. in falling for the entitlement mentality of the prosperity gospel. With satellite TV and internet streaming video, it’s already taking hold. I know Latin America already has its own crop of dominionist prosperity preachers. I pray that they don’t drown out the preaching of the cross.
Brian,
You are right in your assessment and just as right in your concern.
Dan,
You definitely right about (at least) two things today:
1) There is a desperate need for humility in the church,
2) The shower is an incredibly inspiring place– some of my best ideas dropped in my head in there !
slw,
Hey, I’m 2 for 2! That rarely happens.
Dan
I’ve been looking over your series on the “Charismatic Crackup” and I appreciate your restraint in dealing with the issues, and also the final points you make about humility are helpful.
My journey into charismatic doctrine began a few years back. It was influenced by friends who had become charismatic, a close relative who was preaching it, my desire to experience more of God in a supernatural way and last but not least, dealing with a serious sickness in my family. All of these things made me receptive to charismatic teachings and especially attracted to the idea of healing. My blog Jordan’s View began as a “thinking, charismatic” view, then evolved to a “Reformed Charismatic” position. But now, I am definitely more open to listening to cessationist arguments.
I have come to a point of rejecting most of the (Word-Faith) teaching I had been embracing, primarily because I have found it wanting scripturally. In addition to this I have seen that most of the people who practice it are way off– they emphasize prosperity and healing and it’s a Christian version of Oprah. Also I simply don’t see the evidence of miracles and amazing prophetic happenings so many are claiming.
It seems that you are saying that you believe the excesses of the movement are primarily what needs to be curbed, together with a return to more biblical priorities. This is good, but I think something even more fundamental is perhaps necessary– at least that has happened for me. I am willing to consider that the entire movement is wrong at the very root and move on.
If almost all the fruit is rotten, why cling to the belief that the root is somehow untainted? I fear that it is more than just a matter of aberrant practitioners, but that there are core teachings within the movement that are simply wrong according to Scripture.
And really I feel liberated by the idea that God is big and gracious enough to move in me by something as simple as reading and studying my Bible, praying and trying to be obedient to the commands of God. Back to the basics.
P.S. I would personally be very cautious about Watchman Nee’s teaching. He writes very authoritatively but I don’t think many of his concepts can be found strictly from exegesis of Scripture. You might consider this article on Nee.
Alexander,
You wrote: “If almost all the fruit is rotten, why cling to the belief that the root is somehow untainted?”
I have a question: Is sex a good thing or a bad thing?
When done within the God-ordained limits, sex is an awesome thing. Yet it would also be easily argued that nothing could be more tainted than the way most people approach sex.
Not everything within the charismatic movement is tainted. When you’re drowning, the entire world is water—as far as you can tell. But that’s simply not the case. You are experiencing the water in a most deleterious way, but dry land also exists. And if you were on it, you would not be drowning.
I look at this issue the same way. Solid ground exists. To claim that there is none only because we are not experiencing is just another lie of the Enemy. Of course the Devil wants to mess with the gifts. The gifts are good. No, they’re great! So the Enemy wants to keep people away from them so that the Church doesn’t advance at the pace it should. You’ve got entire groups of people who have written off the gifts for no other reason than they don’t want to run the risk of being misled. Well, that’s a terrible thing! If you’re dying of heart disease and need open heart surgery, you can worry that your surgeon may have been out partying the night before and might come into your surgery hungover, unable to operate, but then you’ll never risk the surgery because of that belief. The irony is you never get what you truly need in the end.
And so it is with some people.
Don’t be one of them. Find the dry ground. Many people have found it.
“I have come to a point of rejecting most of the (Word-Faith) teaching I had been embracing, primarily because I have found it wanting scripturally.”
This statement is wanting as it fails to identify what Word-Faith teachings are supposedly unscriptural (being born again? healing in redemption? confession of Jesus’s accomplished work? the present-day workings of the manifestations of the Spirit? the five-fold ministry? Mark 11.23? Mark 16?)
“In addition to this I have have that most of the people who practice it are way off - they emphasize prosperity and healing and it’s a Christian version of Oprah.”
The statement gives rise to the question of how hard you have looked. Personally, I am aware of many Word of Faith ministers who have made huge material sacrifices in their lives for the sake of the Gospel and the ministry. They, however, are not on television.
The association of the Lakeland revival with Word of Faith doctrine and teachings is misplaced. Many categorize all non-denominational charismatic preachers as “Word of Faith” preacher, but that is just not the case.
Every sect within Christianity has its legitimate practitioners and its heretics.
While I don’t consider myself Word-Faith, many people in that movement have a strength of faith and confession that would put many of us to shame. What we call wisdom is often nothing more than excuses not to take God at His promises, something the Word-Faith people do better than most other Christians. We can rationalize just about anything away, but they don’t.
It’s like I wrote here.
Dan,
I stumbled upon your site about a year ago and have been blessed by everything you have written. You have really helped me understand the charasmatic movement. As I have tried to say for years, it isn’t what I can’t understand that bothers me; it’s what I hear you saying that gives me great pause.
Thanks, Sandy.
I hope you don’t write off the charisma because so many people have abused these wonderful gifts. The Devil works overtime to taint the best gifts, and it is no different in this particular example.
All that is needed is good discernment and some very basic policing strategies. Any church can do this. Will they lose some charismaniacs along the way? Yes. I hate to say good riddance, but that may be what some church leaders have to say. Sometimes you have to turn some people over to the Enemy for chastening before they will wise up and fly right.
Dan:
I agree with you that abuses of spiritual gifts don’t necessarily invalidate the possibility of genuine gifts existing that may be used in a biblical way today. Are there particular gifts you’re especially thinking of, that you think are a must for the church? (Forgive me if you’ve written on this–no long answer needed– you can just give me the link to an article, if you want.).
For example, I think prophecy may be a valid gift today, depending on how it’s defined. Currently I lean towards Bob DeWaay’s definition of prophecy, as opposed to the definition of Wayne Grudem (although, he’s one of the most sound continuationist writer/thinkers in my opinion). I totally dismiss the kind of prophecy that the Apostolic/Prophetic movement that endorsed Todd Bentley practices.
Peter:
Thanks for your comments. In researching Bentley I noticed that he is very much influenced by the same Word-Faith books others read and I think his teachings (on Freshfire.ca) reflect this.
For example his Myspace page lists these books: T.L. Osborne (Healing the Sick), Benny Hinn (Goodmorning Holy Spirit), Kenneth Hagin, EW Kenyon, Charles Price (The Real Faith). Definitely Word-Faith influences here, if you ask me.
I have known Word-Faith people who I respect deeply and seem to truly want to honor God in their lifestyle and in their ministry. I think that they are better than what they believe.
As to Word-Faith teachings I don’t think are biblical (for starters):
Healing in the atonement that guarantees physical healing in this life for any believer. Don’t confess symptoms, simply confess and believe “By His stripes I am healed”– and you’ll be healed. (Maybe not).
Baptism in the Holy Spirit as an essential, secondary experience (I believe that one may have special experiences of filling with the Holy Spirit, but wouldn’t call that a 2nd “Baptism”).
Prosperity for the Christian (”Jesus was rich, and so were His apostles”). This one needs no comment.
We are little “gods” (Hinn, Copeland and others teach).
God can do nothing on Earth except as believers grant Him access by way of prayer (Myles Munroe says this, and Copeland seems to say similar things).
You create/command reality by the power of your words. (”Write your own ticket with God” says Hagin).
Undoubtedly there are some anonymous Word-Faith teachers/believers walking closely with the Lord, by His grace, in spite of these teachings. But the people who seem to be leading the movement (Hinn, Copeland, Joyce Meyer, Hagin, Paul and Jan Crouch of TBN, Myles Munroe, Capps. Fred Price, Creflo Dollar), the ones who influence millions through TV and books, are teaching, to be blunt, a whole lot of dangerous nonsense.
Respectfully,
Alex
Alex,
While Bentley may list several books on his website, that doesn’t necessarily correlate to being skillful in the Word on those subjects. We should judge a preacher by his own exposition of the Word, not by the books he puts on his site.
With regard to your Word of Faith preacher list - I’ve written on my own site how the catch-all categorization of Word of Faith preachers is a fallacy. For instance, many of Benny Hinn’s, Kenneth Copeland’s and Creflo Dollar’s teachings are not consistent with those of Kenneth Hagin (or E.W. Kenyon or John Lake).
With regard to your Word of Faith doctrine list - As with anything, solid teachings can be reduced down to bite-sized slogans that may not be accurate. For instance, the “little gods” teaching that you refer to was first preached (to my knowledge) by John G. Lake who preceded the Word of Faith movement (he confessed himself to be Pentecostal). Indeed, Christ for the Nations first published his little book of sermons as “The God-Men” before the little gods teaching was mishandled by subsequent preachers. It was later re-titled as “Spiritual Hunger” after another included sermon.
As Dan pointed out, each camp in the Body of Christ has its skillful practitioners and its ne’er-do-wells. A particular teaching or doctrine shouldn’t be judged on the basis of those who mishandle it.
Have you read Frank Viola’s book “Pagan Christianity?” It explores the roots of our church practices and the harm they have done to the Body of Christ. Also, the sequel to “Pagan Christianity?” is out now. It’s called “Reimagining Church”. It picks up where “Pagan Christianity” left off and continues the conversation. (“Pagan Christianity” was never meant to be a stand alone book; it’s part one of the conversation.) “Reimagining Church” is endorsed by Leonard Sweet, Shane Claiborne, Alan Hirsch, and many others. You can read a sample chapter at
http://www.ReimaginingChurch.org
It’s also available on Amazon.com. Frank is also blogging now at http://www.frankviola.wordpress.com. Also, have you seen the spoof video for “Pagan”? Very funny. Check it out at http://youtube.com/watch?v=hslswIal9u4.
Peter,
Thanks for the comments. You wrote,
Fair enough. But I think it’s clear that skillful or not, Bentley is certainly inspired by Word-Faith teaching.
True, but you asked me to be specific about which WF doctrines I object to scripturally. Within the short space of a comment, I was trying to provide a few brief examples, but of course, not presenting a full argument about any of these. The “healing in the atonement” issue is one though that I’m in the process of developing an article about on my blog Jordan’s View. Perhaps when I’ve posted the article you may be interested in critiquing it.
This is a fair point. Surely each of these teachers would have their own distinctions and needs to be judged on their own merits.
On the other hand, don’t these WF teachers share many beliefs in common? Don’t they often share the same platforms together? Wasn’t Mr. Copeland a disciple of Kenneth Hagin? When evaluating the movement as a whole, shouldn’t one try to understand how its most prominent teachers are related to one another?
It seems like a lot of people are now embarrassed about Bentley and perhaps distancing themselves from him. Personally I see a relationship between what he was doing at Lakeland and the Word-Faith and Signs and Wonders/Vineyard/Apostolic-Prophetic movements. I’ve written about this on my blog recently.
It seems that Bentley separating from his wife has become the issue that for many finally made them begin to see him (or Lakeland?) in a different light (as witnessed in articles around the blogosphere). Yet I get the impression that people were already entertaining doubts about both Bentley and Lakeland and that this unfortunate event became the catalyst for some to question the “Bentley phenomenon”.
Anyway I have observed some very learned, intelligent people (Gary Grieg) for example, presenting whole scholarly essays in defense of the theology of Lakeland/Bentley. Interesting reading, but I remain extremely skeptical, judging by the fruit.
You sound familiar with the “little gods” teaching. So you’re saying there’s a goodversion of it? Well, I guess I’ll have to look into that when I get the chance.
Yes, but when one observes an overall pattern of mishandling, as in the teachers I mentioned before, especially on healing and prosperity, then one may begin to question the validity of the doctrines.
Alex,
I don’t mean to take over Dan’s article (he’s pretty gracious), so just a couple of things.
Whether Bentley was “inspired” by some particular books really isn’t relevant. I’ve been inspired by some of Tom Wright’s books, but that doesn’t make me a Wright disciple. On the other hand, I graduated from Rhema and that doesn’t make me a Hagin disciple.
“Don’t these WF teachers share many beliefs in common?”
That begs the question - how have they been classified as Word of Faith? For instance, you combine Word of Faith with Signs and Wonders/Vineyard/Apostolic-Prophetic movements as of the same stream. Much of the Apostolic-Prophetic movement and Vineyard have nothing to do with basic Word of Faith teachings.
“Wasn’t Mr. Copeland a disciple of Kenneth Hagin?”
There is one infamous WoF critic website that says that Copeland attended Rhema. That is not true. While Mr. Copeland has said that he learned much from Kenneth Hagin’s tapes and books, that cannot stand for the proposition that Hagin is responsible for Copeland’s teachings. That would be like saying that Harvard is responsible for all of its wild-eyed graduates.
The “little gods” - Lake’s treatment of Jesus’s words is on the mark, but it does not resemble some of the later teachings (or even the criticisms) on the subject.
“when one observes an overall pattern of mishandling . . . then one may begin to question the validity of the doctrines”
Frankly, I don’t go along with that. The truths of the Word are real and they are static (Jesus has been resurrected and the canon is closed). A generation’s (or even a handful of TV preachers’) mishandling of the truth doesn’t change the truth.
Peter,
Well, hopefully the comments we’ve been making here are relevant to this series– I think so.
I suppose in order to answer this to your satisfaction I’d have to post an entire article here. But let me ask you this, are the names I’ve mentioned thus far Word-Faith or not, by your definition?
I said a see a relationship between the WOF and Signs and Wonder movements, I didn’t say they were the “same stream”– but I would say the streams overlap. I am also saying they have this in common: both movements declare that miracles are happening in abundance today based upon the idea that Christians have the mandate, authority and power to perform such miracles. Bentley and his activities at Lakeland I believe are an example of this belief in action.
And this is a gigantic declaration to make– it is either true or it isn’t. For example, if one measures the validity of the claim by the track record of real miracles/healings that today’s faith-healers including Bentley have actually performed, then the claim is invalid. Bentley for example promised to provide proof of healing claims to ABC news and failed to do so. This is similar to Benny Hinn who has been challenged to do likewise in the past and failed.
So this is where I see a problem, the discrepancy between much charismatic/Word Faith teaching (yes I know charismatic and Word Faith is not exactly the same thing) and the results. Hagin for example said, “It is not God’s will for any to be sick (Healing, The Fathers Provision, p.9 ) I believe that it is the plan of our father that no believer should be sick that every believer should live his life to full time and actually wear out if Jesus tarries then fall asleep in Jesus. I state boldly that it is not the will of God my father that we should suffer with cancer and other dread disease and reap pain and anguish. No its God’s will that we should be healed.” But he himself suffered with various sicknesses throughout his life, did he not?
I want the reality of the supernatural as much as anyone else. I want to see people getting healed and jumping out of their wheelchairs. But I can’t stomach the denial of reality that is urged by some of these teachings– don’t believe the symptoms, just confess your healing and you’ll get it. Don’t stop confessing it or you’ll lose it…etc. I hate that. I hate seeing people hurt by it. People who are desperate for healing and hungry for God and they are being misled by bad teaching. People being told they are healed when they are not.
Anyway I know I’m making provocative statements without being able to back them up fully in this comments section. If you’re interested you’ll be able to read more thoughts on these issues from me if you visit my blog Jordan’s View in the near future.
I wonder if those people who believe in healing by claiming it ever really think about the person who needs the healing. I was diagnosed with stage IV kidney cancer a year ago and probably have 2 years left at most. I have had people praying for me tell me that all I need to do is “claim my healing; it’s there for me”. Should I think there is something lacking in my belief if I’m not healed? How does anyone know what action will most glorify God? Will it be an outright immediate healing? Or will it glorify Him more for doctors and family members seeing the Christian dying while still praising the Lord and loving Him?
I know that my cancer has certainly brought me closer to the Lord and He is teaching me many things. One is to keep knocking. From Psalm 130: I wait for the Lord, my soul waits,
And in His word I do hope.
Pam,
I am sorry to hear of your condition. I will join you in prayer and waiting. That there is healing in the atonement is beyond doubt (Isa 53:5), where the argument arises is in determining when we get that portion of our inheritance– now or the hereafter. Whereas it is true that we only get the earnest of our inheritance now (Eph1:14; I Corinth 13:9-10), there is no reason to short-change the possibilities entailed. All things are possible to him who has faith.
I commend you on your “regardless faith” (Job13:15), and pray many readers will join you in knocking, I know I will.
Pam, like slw, I am sorry to hear of your condition.
With regard to your questions, may I recommend Charles Price’s book, The Meaning of Faith & The Sick are Healed. Price was an Oxford-trained lawyer who became one of the foremost faith/healing preachers at the turn of the century. In his book, he deals with the kinds of questions that you’ve raised.
Pam,
Thank you for sharing your condition with us. I consider that a privilege that you have done so.
I know people who have been radically healed of end-stage cancer. There IS hope. I think what slw and Peter wrote encapsulated how I would respond. So I will defer to them.
However, I will add this. There are times I wonder what I would do if I were in the same situation. I often wonder if I would hop a plane to some remote place in the Third World where Jesus is all that people have. Those people pray big prayers of the kind that we rarely see here because we are so worldly. If the prayer of a righteous man availeth much, I can only imagine what the prayer lives of these people must be like.
Maybe that’s crazy thinking on my part, but then, maybe it’s not.
Be blessed and keep clinging.
Pam
I also have a friend who was miraculously healed in end stage cancer, and though giving full credit to Jesus and prayer, fails to understand how much his ‘confession’ played an important part. I spent many an hour listening as he felt moved to confess even every little unkind thought! he may have about someone. At the time I thought ” what a fine toothed comb, isn’t this a bit overboard” But I sure can’t argue the result
Another friend has also gone through a course of many healings for many ailments, and most required acknowledgment of and repentance of a specific sin
I could go on with many more examples, however it really saddens me how little understanding there is in the church regarding this and how unwilling it is to confront it
Local Pastor is agreeing, albiet by video.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v.....press.com/
Whitch reaches a bigger audience that our text.
Ironically, BD, I was tipped off to Sheets’s statement by another reader, so yesterday morning I went to Sheets’s site and copied the statement off there. I sent it to my pastor and to another friend at my church who has discussed these things with me.
Sheets can’t be a proxy, no matter how much he wants to be one, though it’s a positive thing that he said what he did. He may come out of this like Andrew Strom, who bolted the prophetic movement under similar circumstances. My pastor taught a series on the tripartite nature of man that was based on some of Sheets’s writings and it was extraordinarily good, one of the best sermon series I have ever heard—ever. So maybe Sheets will be a leader out of this mess. Who knows?
The fact is, though, that the principal players in this scenario have to own up, fess up, and get out of the picture for a while. Their theology is built on hallucinations in far too many cases and not the Word. They are the religious equivalent of rampant consumerism and “let the good times roll” thinking that acts as if the pigeons are never going to come home to roost. Well, they’ve come home—in spades. We need those people to go dormant—maybe even forever.
I am just sickened over all this. Good for Sheets, but I have to ask how it is going to better his own ministry going forward. Each of us is supposed to look after his own house first. Are we doing that in the charismatic movement? Obviously not in far too many cases.
Dear Pam:
Thank you very much for sharing about your illness. I am so sorry to hear that you are suffering with this condition. At the same time your expression of hope in the midst of your situation is encouraging to me, and I am sure, to others.
While I have no doubt that those who believe in faith-healing are well-meaning, I believe that they have built a hope for healing that is not proven by Scripture. The problem is the exception.
What about the person who doesn’t get healed? I’m sure that you have probably heard of people who were praying for a sick person– a whole church united in prayer– and often that church is one where faith healing doctrines are preached and believed– and the person does not get well, or even, dies.
I have personally witnessed these cases, I’m sure you have too. OK, so why? Why if healing is the “birthright” of the Christian as so many claim, do we see these kinds of results in answer to earnest prayer?
Well, I don’t know why exactly; probably no one does. But there are some answers we find in Scripture.
God is with us– whether we live or die– and He gives us grace sufficient to deal with our situations. He is sovereign– and though He sometimes (perhaps often) does things we don’t understand, yet we also have evidence in our lives of His mercy and love and power and care for us. In this we find comfort and even deep joy, despite our pains.
Praise God that you have grown closer to Him during your trial.
Also, I submit for your consideration this sermon by John McArthur: Does God Still Heal? Of course McArthur is no charismatic (and for some reason he misspells a lot of people’s names here) but I believe that this message has excellent points about the chief difference between those who preach faith healing today (and in the recent past) and Jesus’ healing ministry– real results. It may provide some answers to questions you’ve raised, or at least give you food for thought.
Blessings and grace in Him,
Alex
MacArthur’s treatment of healing is based upon a flawed exegesis of Old Testament verses. His theology is also derived from failed experience rather than what the Scriptures declare.
If healing is not founded upon redemption, i.e., Matthew 8.17, then the Christian has no scriptural authority to pray for it and James’s prayer of faith should be eviscerated from our canon. (It seems to me that people who pray for healing who don’t believe that it is part of redemption are the ones who are “writing their own ticket from God” with emphasis on “own”).
As a teenager, I presented such a case of snow blindness that the attending physician said that my rods and cones were completely burned away and that I would become blind (another one of his patients had a more mild case and lost all of her sight in the afflicted eye). Thankfully, the pastor in my church believed in the prayer of faith and today I have 20/20 or better.
As Oral Roberts says, “as for healing, I’ve seen too much to ever think that it is not part of our inheritance.”
Alex
See my comment to Pam above…
P.S. Seems I messed up the link to the McArthur article. Here it is again:
Does God Still Heal?
Peter,
As I mentioned above the problem in the healing theory is with the exceptions, and you have not answered this objection.
The fact that you were healed through prayer and others also have been healed is truly wonderful, but doesn’t prove the theory of healing taught by faith healers. It shows that God may mercifully answer the prayers of His children, according to His sovereign will.
It seems to me that healing is only included in the atonement in an ultimate sense– that is, we will all be completely healed when Christ redeems us completely– but both Scripture and experience show that healing is not guaranteed in this life because of Christ’s death. Even in New Testament days people were not always being healed.
Why did the Paul tell Timothy to take wine for his ongoing stomach troubles? According to your thought shouldn’t he have advised him instead to believe in God for complete healing, based on Christ’s provision? Why did Paul, through whom God had worked such amazing miracles of healing, leave Trophimus behind, apparently too sick to travel with Paul? Couldn’t he have done a miraculous healing for one of his partners in ministry or at least prayed for healing to be accomplished based on Christ’s provision? Why did Paul not receive healing for his own apparent physical ailment (thorn in the flesh) ? Why is there there seem to be no teaching in Paul’s epistles that speaks of health benefits for believers in this life that derive from the Cross?
Rather in speaking of the redemption of the body, Paul says, in Romans 8: 23-25,
;
and also,
Matthew 8:17 tells us that in the earthly ministry of Jesus, a prophecy of Isaiah is fulfilled, proving that Christ is the promised Messiah. Matthew 8:17 is only indirectly related to the atonement.
I think the pattern described in James 5 is what the church is being taught to do in response to sickness, and that the prayer of faith will heal the sick when God gives clear assurance by the Spirit that that is what is going to happen. James 5 does not guarantee healing; I think it provides us with a model to follow.
I think that according to Paul’s teaching above, sickness and physical weakness are part of this life. But believers do have the opportunity and privilege to pray that amazing healing miracles be done because we know that God can do anything and He often does answer such prayers. It is just that such prayers are ultimately God’s to answer– I don’t believe we have the same authority over disease that the faith healers claim. We are not little gods.
Leaving things up to “God’s sovereign will” is fatalism disguised as Christianity. That kind of fatalism is not reflected anywhere in the Word.
In not one instance did Jesus turn anyone away who was seeking healing. He never said, “Sorry, but God’s chosen this damnable sickness for you so I’m not going to meddle with it. Go and be blessed.” On the other hand, the Word says that he couldn’t do any mighty miracles in Nazareth because of their unbelief.
I imagine that many Nazarenes sat around Starbucks after Jesus left town waxing philosophically about God’s “sovereign” will and so-and-so’s illness.
My faith is not based on some kind of “healing theory.” It is based upon what the Word demonstrates to be our inheritance as believers. And if some charismatic preachers aren’t skilled in preaching that part of the Word, that is not going to cause me to throw away my faith.
Here, here Peter! Amen!
Peter,
If holding to the truth of God’s word regarding God’s sovereignty over all things, including healing, makes me a “fatalist”, then so be it. I’ve been called that name before though it is a false charge. Does believing in God’s sovereignty make believers fatalists?
I simply don’t know that God is always call to heal in every case– and neither do you. “Come now, you who say, “Today or tomorrow we will go into such and such a town and spend a year there and trade and make a profit”— yet you do not know what tomorrow will bring. What is your life? For you are a mist that appears for a little time and then vanishes. Instead you ought to say, “If the Lord wills, we will live and do this or that.” As it is, you boast in your arrogance. All such boasting is evil. James 4:13-16″
Unless you’ve been given a gift of faith– a particular assurance by the Spirit that He is going to heal in a particular instance (what I think the prayer of faith in James 5 may be referring to) then you and I have no business pronouncing healing on anyone based on something the bible doesn’t teach.
Regarding application to this life, we know that the atonement “heals” souls of their sin-sickness. The provision for complete physical healing is one that will be fulfilled when Jesus returns, although He may also give us foretastes of that healing in our earthly lives. It certainly doesn’t guarantee physical healing, as the countless people who don’t get healed following the teaching you believe demonstrates.
First call me a fatalist, then add sarcasm. OK, be as sarcastic as you like, it doesn’t change the fact that even Jesus, being in one place at one time during His earthly ministry, did not in fact heal every sick person in Israel. Sometimes it was because of the people’s lack of faith. But what of the peoples not healed because He did not visit or go to them?
The man healed at the pool of Bethesda seemed to have been just one of many that were there for healing the day Jesus came and healed Him. Jesus healed only that man. And it’s difficult to tell whether the man had much faith for healing– his answer to Jesus’ question, “Do you want to be healed” doesn’t seem to be full of faith (John 5:7). There were others that Jesus healed as well, whose faith was lacking.
The fact that He healed some then and not others? I would attribute to God’s sovereignty.
Your concept of healing says that since God is always willing to heal and has provided healing for all, if a person doesn’t get healed the cause is their unbelief, or so you imply. It’s easy to label someone a fatalist and imply that they have unbelief, but it’s not so easy it seems, for you to answer the question about the numerous exceptions to your healing teaching.
Alex,
You’re right, Jesus didn’t even everybody in Israel. In speaking to his home folks in Nazareth, he pointed out that Elijah was sent to a widow in Zarephath and not to those in Israel. The question is: why? You say that it is all God’s responsibility ( because he is sovereign). I’d rather go with how Jesus put in Luke 4.18-30.
To ask “but what of the peoples not healed because He did not visit or go to them” is not a well-framed question (again, it puts all the responsibility of healing upon God). Most (if not all) of the Gospel accounts of healing exhibit the fact that the people came to Jesus for healing (much of his healing ministry was reactive) - Jairus, Bartimaeus, the lepers, Syrophenician woman, and the list goes on.
The woman with the issue of blood did not wallow in her bedridden state saying to herself, “Well, if Jesus really wants to heal me then God will tell him to swing by here. I’ll just wait because when Jesus knocks on the door I’ll know it’s God’s sovereign will to heal me.” Instead of that, the woman went through extreme measures to get to him. We very rarely see anything like that nowadays.
If you want to believe that God’s “sovereign” will is at play with sickness, you are certainly free to do that. You certainly can’t count me in.
With regard to “the numerous exceptions to [my] healing teaching,” I assume that you haven’t read my stuff (there’s a lot of it) so I won’t comment on that.
Peter,
You said,
Just because I believe that it is God’s sovereign will that decides who gets healed (if He is sovereign, then all events are included under His sovereignty, aren’t they?) doesn’t mean I advocate passivity and “fatalism”. True I haven’t read all you’ve written on your website. But it appears you haven’t read my comments carefully here, since I have not advocated a passive, faithless approach but said above that James 5 provides a model for believers to follow when one is sick. I also said that I certainly do believe God can work great miracles even today.
Yes, Jesus healed everyone who came to Him during His earthly ministry, to prove He was the Messiah, to show forth His compassion, and to demonstrate His authority to both forgive sins and heal the body. This in itself does not prove that Jesus is doing the same today through faith healers. The evidence in fact, shows otherwise, since the faith healers can’t do what Jesus did, nor do they teach accurately the Word of God.
God’s sovereignty is expressed in that Jesus was born in Bethlehem and had His ministry in this one region of the world, choosing to travel to certain parts and not others during His ministry. True, many came to Jesus to be healed, but also He healed as He went along from place to place- so some of the healings seemed to be divine encounters where the opportunity to get healed presented itself for certain people–not necessarily people going through extreme measures.
God didn’t choose Israel because they were so great or so faithful, but that He might display His glory through a specific people, for His own reason and purpose (Deuteronomy 7:7-9).
In the same way, I don’t think that healing is all about how many hoops we jump through to show God that we have enough faith to grant healing– it is more a matter of Him acting according to His mercy and wisdom.
What of people traveling from distant countries all over the world flying to Lakeland at great expense, in hope that they might find miraculous healing there? Then they encounter a man speaking about his visitations with angels and how he punches people in the stomach to heal them. So many leave such events disappointed and unhealed.
But if you favor the great healing campaigns of yesteryear, and claim that they were more authentic, how do you account for the fact that their foundational theology is the same as Bentley’s, with only differences in style? Shouldn’t you throw your support behind Bentley and Lakeland, since he preaches what it seems you espouse? Instead you’re saying that “certain charismatic preachers aren’t skilled in preaching that part of the Word”. But they are preaching/teaching the essentially same healing message as that of the past, with very minor differences.
Alexander,
I don’t think Peter did, and I know I don’t vouch for any of these traveling “healing evangelists.” I think it’s beyond argument that most of them are at best inefficient (that’s kind for a batting of average of at most .030 or .040) and at worst out and out frauds. The manifestation of gifts healings is what they supposedly exhibit, but that is entirely different than James’ prayer for the sick or the doctrine of healing in the atonement. The manifestation would be properly seen under the sovereignty of God (the Spirit wills the manifestations), whereas the appropriation by faith of the healing accomplished in the atonement is already established by the finished work of Christ.
If a Christian sins and asks forgiveness, do you see a possibility that God may make a sovereign choice not to forgive it?
slw,
When a Christian asks for forgiveness they will be forgiven because God has chosen them and they are His and he will not lose them. Forgiveness of sin is explicitly promised to the believer (1 John 1:9) whereas the prayer of faith in James 5 I don’t believe is an absolute guarantee of healing every time. As I said above, I believe the prayer of faith is a supernatural gift of faith given by God that assures the elders praying that it is the Lord’s will to heal in a particular instance.
Todd Bentley, as do all the other faith healers, bases his healing ministry on the foundation of the teaching of healing in the atonement. If you need proof, go to his article, SOZO - Salvation, Deliverance, and Healing, which contains typical Word-Faith doctrine. Sure, Bentley speaks of other things that bring about healing miracles, such as healing angels being released, and that new revelations he personally gets from God tell him that now an “apostolic” anointing is being released that will bring back signs and wonders like the apostles did back into the church.
But the foundational teaching– that we need to exercise faith in the healing provided by the atonement– is exactly what Bentley and others teach. If Bentley then is at best “inefficient” or even a fraud, is it not because this foundational teaching is false? What will it take to see the connection between this false doctrine and its bad results?
If healing is for today because of the atonement; if the same never-failing provision for sin applies also to bodily healing, then healing is guaranteed for all! But does this line up with the reality of healing? No it does not. When you pray for someone to be healed, can you guarantee absolutely their healing?
Alex,
I don’t know how you find so much wiggle room in James 5:14-6, frankly I don’t see exceptions or provisos there. I think Isaiah 53:4-5 is just as unambiguous as is Matthew’s citation of the same (Matthew 8:16-17). That there is a partial quality to our reception of