2PhiloVoid Posted April 4, 2015 Share Posted April 4, 2015 Alright, Dude. Maybe it’s just the effusive effects of the ash and stench in the Stinky Spaghetti I’ve been serving up, but whatever it is, it seems I need to clear the air of my mismanaged communication. First, I understand and appreciate your effort to clarify what it means to “keep one’s audience in mind.” Your response to my apparent failures is helpful, and you’ve been affable and practical in pointing out that anything other than “cutting to the chase” in this forum will probably just get me ignored. So, thank you for the advice. Because of that, I’m also learning to stay away from the use of cheap, ironic humor in this venue; it seems to be a liability here. I agree that somewhere along the way while writing my previous, elongated post (#97), I overstepped the bounds of appropriateness for the Lion’s Den. I regret that action since I don’t want to waste anyone’s time, not to mention my own. However, there is one caveat--I intended for that post to be a wee bit longer, and I made it that way in the hope that I could emphasize a few of the complexities present within the interpretive processes which should be addressed when reading ancient, foreign books like the Bible, or any book for that matter. Surely, we can agree that tracks have to be firmly laid down before a train can be run over any given ground, and our traversing the bible is no different. To my chagrin, I’m realizing more and more all the time that people just don’t care one way or the other about how aspects of Communication Theory (among other things) play a real part in reading and applying a written work like the Bible. From my own experience, it seems this lack of concern is prevalent among a lot of people, whether they’re Christian or Un-Christian. At times, this really bugs me, but I realize that some of my own feelings about this are my own “personal problem,” and I apparently have more work to do on not being surprised by it or allowing myself to wonder “why?” If I’m right about the Bible’s complexity, then reasonably, I can’t necessarily fault people for the ambivalence they might have to it. Now, Dude.…about this “cutting to the chase” stuff. I have a difficult time seeing just where the line is to be drawn between “cutting to the chase” and just being plain “curt” about things. But, here it goes… In assessing the meaning of James 5:13-16 as it relates to Christian prayer and healing, your choice of these specific verses is mostly arbitrary, and appears to be done without recourse or regard to hermeneutic practice and/or communication theory. Alternatively, I’d like to propose that in the place of your arbitrary choice of said verses, we should actually begin in James 5:7 and read through verse 18. Why? Because this choice represents the contextual thought flow of the writer: it continues with the thematic framework presented at the beginning of James’ letter in Chapter 1, where he specifically addresses the motifs of spiritual patience, endurance, and perseverance as applied to authentic faith. Your choice of verses bypasses this whole consideration and lifts four verses from their embedded context, wrenching the joints of their full implication, and application, out of their sockets. Needless to say, your approach leaves us--the readers—with misconstrued opportunity and the potential for vast disappointment when we eventually learn that we’re not able to actually cash what seems to be (in English, anyway) a well-deserved, blank check for healing and answered prayer. Dude, you don’t have to respond. Even though I've enjoyed our conversation, all of this is “Stinky Spaghetti,” and I know you probably don’t want to choke down the dinner I’ve prepared. I’m just saying; “cutting to the chase.” I think I’ll head over to Ficino next. Peace 2PhiloVoid Oh I wouldn't say you broke any rules. If you had one of the moderators would let you know. It's just your posts would be a lot more meaningful if they had less fluff in them. You might be right about James. The original had no break in it and was read strait through. Hi Mymistake, I'm glad someone here is willing to acknowledge this; and as you've just shown, it is possible to acknowledge my point while still retaining your own ex-christian POV, which is okay by me. Thanks for the comment. Peace 2PhiloVoid Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FreeThinkerNZ Posted April 4, 2015 Share Posted April 4, 2015 Excellent! Let’s talk context here, then. Philo is right—James does talk about the need for patient endurance, and the reality of suffering even for believers. In context, healing isn’t guaranteed, but neither is the idea so easily dismissed as you would like, Philo, in context. If god leads people to believe he will heal if he sees fit, and healing doesn’t come . . . what then? We just say, Oh well, his ways, our ways, father knows best. I’m earning my mansion up in glory by all this suffering, praise his Unusually Holy Name. In context, James urges the believer to seek for healing through prayer and anointing with oil. You can’t avoid this. Why else would someone come to be anointed and prayed over if they didn’t have good hope of god answering the prayer? Did James write, “Are any of you sick, or mentally ill? Buck up, brother and sister, you can’t expect god to do anything for you, Haymen?” No, he wants them to pack off to the elders to get their healing from god. And what would be the purpose of James using Job and Elijah as examples if it wasn’t meant to prove just how powerfully god can intervene in extraordinary answers to prayer? Or just how much god in his tender mercy wants to set all things right again? And these examples aren’t given as if it is a rare exception—in context, this is the normal course of things for James. People suffer, but patient endurance and the prayer of faith can set all things right again. (Don’t get me started on the context of James 1, where he basically says that if you don’t receive answers to your prayers it’s your fault for having such weak faith or an unstable mind. Tough shit. How dare you question god?!) This discussion proves just how pliable the bible is to any interpretation you wish to find. Context in the words and phrases matters less than the context of the individual interpreter. And, after all this, we still don’t have a good answer to Dude’s question! Hi St Jeff, I'll be concise. I disagree with your proposition that James 5 is presenting anything in the way of normative ease or any kind of unconditional cast for prayer and healing. Since the context is, as you've conceded, embedded in the themes of perseverance, endurance, and faithfulness through the long haul, etc, and being that James mentions two examples of "righteous" people--anything but common at all--we see then by this overall context that it is the 'righteous' prayers of 'righteous' church leaders who may bring about healing. And when James means 'righteous,' were talking about some spiritually potent men, not Jimmy Swaggart or Benny Hinn types. Have you ever known a church leader, in our day and age, who had the endurance, faithfulness, and righteous track record of a Job or Elijah? I don't. In fact, I personally have never come across one; and I KNOW I can't say that I ever been that way myself. Wish I was; wish I had been. I wouldn't mind being so solid in faith that I'll find myself being whisked away in a Chariot of Fire, but I know that over the years, I've had some morally 'crapfest' moments. So, tough lot for me too! So, I guess I'll be going to the hospital next time I get hit with something... Peace 2PhiloVoid So, the reason prayer for healing doesn't work is that no one is righteous enough. Convenient. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mymistake Posted April 4, 2015 Share Posted April 4, 2015 Have you ever known a church leader, in our day and age, who had the endurance, faithfulness, and righteous track record of a Job or Elijah? 1 Kings 18:40 And Elijah said unto them, Take the prophets of Baal; let not one of them escape. And they took them: and Elijah brought them down to the brook Kishon, and slew them there. Elijah was a mass murderer. He murdered 850 people for a thought crime. I've met many Christians who had the endurance and faithfulness of Job. Or at least they come as close to it as possible without being a fairy tale. I use to be one. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2PhiloVoid Posted April 5, 2015 Share Posted April 5, 2015 Hi St Jeff, I'll be concise. I disagree with your proposition that James 5 is presenting anything in the way of normative ease or any kind of unconditional cast for prayer and healing. Since the context is, as you've conceded, embedded in the themes of perseverance, endurance, and faithfulness through the long haul, etc, and being that James mentions two examples of "righteous" people--anything but common at all--we see then by this overall context that it is the 'righteous' prayers of 'righteous' church leaders who may bring about healing. And when James means 'righteous,' were talking about some spiritually potent men, not Jimmy Swaggart or Benny Hinn types. Have you ever known a church leader, in our day and age, who had the endurance, faithfulness, and righteous track record of a Job or Elijah? I don't. In fact, I personally have never come across one; and I KNOW I can't say that I ever been that way myself. Wish I was; wish I had been. I wouldn't mind being so solid in faith that I'll find myself being whisked away in a Chariot of Fire, but I know that over the years, I've had some morally 'crapfest' moments. So, tough lot for me too! So, I guess I'll be going to the hospital next time I get hit with something... Peace 2PhiloVoid Ha! Good post, Philo. If all James is saying is that we're in for a lot of suffering in life (no duh); and only in the rarest of circumstances, with only with the most giantest men of faith can we expect healing, I would conclude that James has nothing to add to the discussion. Can we safely follow Luther's lead and dismiss James as an "epistle of straw"? StJeff, Good com' back, Bro!! (lol) But.....concisely, no. It just means that James lives in a time (i.e. 1st century) when...heck...apostles and other church leaders are supposedly walking around with the character and power of Elijah at their disposal. We in the modern world could only dream what--if it was real--it must have been like. For James, it makes a heck of a lot of sense, from what we glean from his context, that if someone is 'sickly' in body and/or spirit (the Greek seems to indicate this), then we need to be seriously thinking about who we're going to call? And It probably ain't gonna be Ghostbusters! More conciseness to come...... Peace 2PhiloVoid Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2PhiloVoid Posted April 5, 2015 Share Posted April 5, 2015 Excellent! Let’s talk context here, then. Philo is right—James does talk about the need for patient endurance, and the reality of suffering even for believers. In context, healing isn’t guaranteed, but neither is the idea so easily dismissed as you would like, Philo, in context. If god leads people to believe he will heal if he sees fit, and healing doesn’t come . . . what then? We just say, Oh well, his ways, our ways, father knows best. I’m earning my mansion up in glory by all this suffering, praise his Unusually Holy Name. In context, James urges the believer to seek for healing through prayer and anointing with oil. You can’t avoid this. Why else would someone come to be anointed and prayed over if they didn’t have good hope of god answering the prayer? Did James write, “Are any of you sick, or mentally ill? Buck up, brother and sister, you can’t expect god to do anything for you, Haymen?” No, he wants them to pack off to the elders to get their healing from god. And what would be the purpose of James using Job and Elijah as examples if it wasn’t meant to prove just how powerfully god can intervene in extraordinary answers to prayer? Or just how much god in his tender mercy wants to set all things right again? And these examples aren’t given as if it is a rare exception—in context, this is the normal course of things for James. People suffer, but patient endurance and the prayer of faith can set all things right again. (Don’t get me started on the context of James 1, where he basically says that if you don’t receive answers to your prayers it’s your fault for having such weak faith or an unstable mind. Tough shit. How dare you question god?!) This discussion proves just how pliable the bible is to any interpretation you wish to find. Context in the words and phrases matters less than the context of the individual interpreter. And, after all this, we still don’t have a good answer to Dude’s question! Hi St Jeff, I'll be concise. I disagree with your proposition that James 5 is presenting anything in the way of normative ease or any kind of unconditional cast for prayer and healing. Since the context is, as you've conceded, embedded in the themes of perseverance, endurance, and faithfulness through the long haul, etc, and being that James mentions two examples of "righteous" people--anything but common at all--we see then by this overall context that it is the 'righteous' prayers of 'righteous' church leaders who may bring about healing. And when James means 'righteous,' were talking about some spiritually potent men, not Jimmy Swaggart or Benny Hinn types. Have you ever known a church leader, in our day and age, who had the endurance, faithfulness, and righteous track record of a Job or Elijah? I don't. In fact, I personally have never come across one; and I KNOW I can't say that I ever been that way myself. Wish I was; wish I had been. I wouldn't mind being so solid in faith that I'll find myself being whisked away in a Chariot of Fire, but I know that over the years, I've had some morally 'crapfest' moments. So, tough lot for me too! So, I guess I'll be going to the hospital next time I get hit with something... Peace 2PhiloVoid So, the reason prayer for healing doesn't work is that no one is righteous enough. Convenient. Isn't it, though? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FreeThinkerNZ Posted April 5, 2015 Share Posted April 5, 2015 StJeff, Good com' back, Bro!! (lol) But.....concisely, no. It just means that James lives in a time (i.e. 1st century) when...heck...apostles and other church leaders are supposedly walking around with the character and power of Elijah at their disposal. We in the modern world could only dream what--if it was real--it must have been like. For James, it makes a heck of a lot of sense, from what we glean from his context, that if someone is 'sickly' in body and/or spirit (the Greek seems to indicate this), then we need to be seriously thinking about who we're going to call? And It probably ain't gonna be Ghostbusters! More concision to come...... Peace 2PhiloVoid Key word highlighted. Also, at least the Ghostbusters answer their calls. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2PhiloVoid Posted April 5, 2015 Share Posted April 5, 2015 Have you ever known a church leader, in our day and age, who had the endurance, faithfulness, and righteous track record of a Job or Elijah? 1 Kings 18:40 And Elijah said unto them, Take the prophets of Baal; let not one of them escape. And they took them: and Elijah brought them down to the brook Kishon, and slew them there. Elijah was a mass murderer. He murdered 850 people for a thought crime. I've met many Christians who had the endurance and faithfulness of Job. Or at least they come as close to it as possible without being a fairy tale. I use to be one. I knew it was just a matter of minutes before someone pulled that out of the hat. Good job, MM!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FreeThinkerNZ Posted April 5, 2015 Share Posted April 5, 2015 Hi St Jeff, I'll be concise. I disagree with your proposition that James 5 is presenting anything in the way of normative ease or any kind of unconditional cast for prayer and healing. Since the context is, as you've conceded, embedded in the themes of perseverance, endurance, and faithfulness through the long haul, etc, and being that James mentions two examples of "righteous" people--anything but common at all--we see then by this overall context that it is the 'righteous' prayers of 'righteous' church leaders who may bring about healing. And when James means 'righteous,' were talking about some spiritually potent men, not Jimmy Swaggart or Benny Hinn types. Have you ever known a church leader, in our day and age, who had the endurance, faithfulness, and righteous track record of a Job or Elijah? I don't. In fact, I personally have never come across one; and I KNOW I can't say that I ever been that way myself. Wish I was; wish I had been. I wouldn't mind being so solid in faith that I'll find myself being whisked away in a Chariot of Fire, but I know that over the years, I've had some morally 'crapfest' moments. So, tough lot for me too! So, I guess I'll be going to the hospital next time I get hit with something... Peace 2PhiloVoid So, the reason prayer for healing doesn't work is that no one is righteous enough. Convenient. Isn't it, though? You may find it amusing, but I don't think sick and dying people see the humour when their hopes are dashed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2PhiloVoid Posted April 5, 2015 Share Posted April 5, 2015 StJeff, Good com' back, Bro!! (lol) But.....concisely, no. It just means that James lives in a time (i.e. 1st century) when...heck...apostles and other church leaders are supposedly walking around with the character and power of Elijah at their disposal. We in the modern world could only dream what--if it was real--it must have been like. For James, it makes a heck of a lot of sense, from what we glean from his context, that if someone is 'sickly' in body and/or spirit (the Greek seems to indicate this), then we need to be seriously thinking about who we're going to call? And It probably ain't gonna be Ghostbusters! More concision to come...... Peace 2PhiloVoid Key word highlighted. Also, at least the Ghostbusters answer their calls. Well, yeah. I'm giving all of you guys the benefit of ...the doubt. This is your Den, isn't it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FreeThinkerNZ Posted April 5, 2015 Share Posted April 5, 2015 Have you ever known a church leader, in our day and age, who had the endurance, faithfulness, and righteous track record of a Job or Elijah? 1 Kings 18:40 And Elijah said unto them, Take the prophets of Baal; let not one of them escape. And they took them: and Elijah brought them down to the brook Kishon, and slew them there. Elijah was a mass murderer. He murdered 850 people for a thought crime. I've met many Christians who had the endurance and faithfulness of Job. Or at least they come as close to it as possible without being a fairy tale. I use to be one. I knew it was just a matter of minutes before someone pulled that out of the hat. Good job, MM!!! Or, perhaps you were unaware of what the bible says about Elijah. It's ok, I never read much of it either, until after I deconverted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FreeThinkerNZ Posted April 5, 2015 Share Posted April 5, 2015 StJeff, Good com' back, Bro!! (lol) But.....concisely, no. It just means that James lives in a time (i.e. 1st century) when...heck...apostles and other church leaders are supposedly walking around with the character and power of Elijah at their disposal. We in the modern world could only dream what--if it was real--it must have been like. For James, it makes a heck of a lot of sense, from what we glean from his context, that if someone is 'sickly' in body and/or spirit (the Greek seems to indicate this), then we need to be seriously thinking about who we're going to call? And It probably ain't gonna be Ghostbusters! More concision to come...... Peace 2PhiloVoid Key word highlighted. Also, at least the Ghostbusters answer their calls. Well, yeah. I'm giving all of you guys the benefit of ...the doubt. This is your Den, isn't it? What good does it do to tell the sick or dying that calling on your god will do anything other than make them feel good for a while, followed by bitter disappointment and self-hatred? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mymistake Posted April 5, 2015 Share Posted April 5, 2015 Have you ever known a church leader, in our day and age, who had the endurance, faithfulness, and righteous track record of a Job or Elijah? 1 Kings 18:40 And Elijah said unto them, Take the prophets of Baal; let not one of them escape. And they took them: and Elijah brought them down to the brook Kishon, and slew them there. Elijah was a mass murderer. He murdered 850 people for a thought crime. I've met many Christians who had the endurance and faithfulness of Job. Or at least they come as close to it as possible without being a fairy tale. I use to be one. I knew it was just a matter of minutes before someone pulled that out of the hat. Good job, MM!!! Okay but why not address the issue? You follow a religion that is based on a book that glorifies violence, genocide and all kinds of evil. The Bible is no kind of moral guide. If we can't trust the Bible on the things we can measure then why should we trust the Bible on spiritual matters? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2PhiloVoid Posted April 5, 2015 Share Posted April 5, 2015 Hi St Jeff, I'll be concise. I disagree with your proposition that James 5 is presenting anything in the way of normative ease or any kind of unconditional cast for prayer and healing. Since the context is, as you've conceded, embedded in the themes of perseverance, endurance, and faithfulness through the long haul, etc, and being that James mentions two examples of "righteous" people--anything but common at all--we see then by this overall context that it is the 'righteous' prayers of 'righteous' church leaders who may bring about healing. And when James means 'righteous,' were talking about some spiritually potent men, not Jimmy Swaggart or Benny Hinn types. Have you ever known a church leader, in our day and age, who had the endurance, faithfulness, and righteous track record of a Job or Elijah? I don't. In fact, I personally have never come across one; and I KNOW I can't say that I ever been that way myself. Wish I was; wish I had been. I wouldn't mind being so solid in faith that I'll find myself being whisked away in a Chariot of Fire, but I know that over the years, I've had some morally 'crapfest' moments. So, tough lot for me too! So, I guess I'll be going to the hospital next time I get hit with something... Peace 2PhiloVoid So, the reason prayer for healing doesn't work is that no one is righteous enough. Convenient. Isn't it, though? You may find it amusing, but I don't think sick and dying people see the humour when their hopes are dashed. Free, let me be serious and concise....don't mistake my levity while holding discussion as some kind of sick sense of depravity and insensitivity to the plight of millions around the world who are suffering profusely. I am no such sicko. Can we get past that? Because I've had my own share of suffering, as I told you some many posts back, I know what it is like to live in a constant, abysmal mental hell-hole. It's just that through those many years, I've decided that I'm not going to settle for a morose Outlook-On-Life, at least not every second of every day. If my cheap attempts at humor bug the heck out of you, then I'll make a special effort to speak to you clearly, plainly, and without joviality. Peace 2PhiloVoid Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StJeffTheIncomprehensible Posted April 5, 2015 Share Posted April 5, 2015 Hi St Jeff, I'll be concise. I disagree with your proposition that James 5 is presenting anything in the way of normative ease or any kind of unconditional cast for prayer and healing. Since the context is, as you've conceded, embedded in the themes of perseverance, endurance, and faithfulness through the long haul, etc, and being that James mentions two examples of "righteous" people--anything but common at all--we see then by this overall context that it is the 'righteous' prayers of 'righteous' church leaders who may bring about healing. And when James means 'righteous,' were talking about some spiritually potent men, not Jimmy Swaggart or Benny Hinn types. Have you ever known a church leader, in our day and age, who had the endurance, faithfulness, and righteous track record of a Job or Elijah? I don't. In fact, I personally have never come across one; and I KNOW I can't say that I ever been that way myself. Wish I was; wish I had been. I wouldn't mind being so solid in faith that I'll find myself being whisked away in a Chariot of Fire, but I know that over the years, I've had some morally 'crapfest' moments. So, tough lot for me too! So, I guess I'll be going to the hospital next time I get hit with something... Peace 2PhiloVoid Ha! Good post, Philo. If all James is saying is that we're in for a lot of suffering in life (no duh); and only in the rarest of circumstances, with only with the most giantest men of faith can we expect healing, I would conclude that James has nothing to add to the discussion. Can we safely follow Luther's lead and dismiss James as an "epistle of straw"? StJeff, Good com' back, Bro!! (lol) But.....concisely, no. It just means that James lives in a time (i.e. 1st century) when...heck...apostles and other church leaders are supposedly walking around with the character and power of Elijah at their disposal. We in the modern world could only dream what--if it was real--it must have been like. For James, it makes a heck of a lot of sense, from what we glean from his context, that if someone is 'sickly' in body and/or spirit (the Greek seems to indicate this), then we need to be seriously thinking about who we're going to call? And It probably ain't gonna be Ghostbusters! More conciseness to come...... Peace 2PhiloVoid Are you saying that the modern lesson of James for the ill is to make sure you call someone who can be of some real help--that is, a doctor? Not god, a church elder, or holy prayer warrior? Cool. We now go to science for what we used to go to god for. God is becoming more and more irrelevant. I like the way this is heading!! 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2PhiloVoid Posted April 5, 2015 Share Posted April 5, 2015 Hi St Jeff, I'll be concise. I disagree with your proposition that James 5 is presenting anything in the way of normative ease or any kind of unconditional cast for prayer and healing. Since the context is, as you've conceded, embedded in the themes of perseverance, endurance, and faithfulness through the long haul, etc, and being that James mentions two examples of "righteous" people--anything but common at all--we see then by this overall context that it is the 'righteous' prayers of 'righteous' church leaders who may bring about healing. And when James means 'righteous,' were talking about some spiritually potent men, not Jimmy Swaggart or Benny Hinn types. Have you ever known a church leader, in our day and age, who had the endurance, faithfulness, and righteous track record of a Job or Elijah? I don't. In fact, I personally have never come across one; and I KNOW I can't say that I ever been that way myself. Wish I was; wish I had been. I wouldn't mind being so solid in faith that I'll find myself being whisked away in a Chariot of Fire, but I know that over the years, I've had some morally 'crapfest' moments. So, tough lot for me too! So, I guess I'll be going to the hospital next time I get hit with something... Peace 2PhiloVoid Ha! Good post, Philo. If all James is saying is that we're in for a lot of suffering in life (no duh); and only in the rarest of circumstances, with only with the most giantest men of faith can we expect healing, I would conclude that James has nothing to add to the discussion. Can we safely follow Luther's lead and dismiss James as an "epistle of straw"? StJeff, Good com' back, Bro!! (lol) But.....concisely, no. It just means that James lives in a time (i.e. 1st century) when...heck...apostles and other church leaders are supposedly walking around with the character and power of Elijah at their disposal. We in the modern world could only dream what--if it was real--it must have been like. For James, it makes a heck of a lot of sense, from what we glean from his context, that if someone is 'sickly' in body and/or spirit (the Greek seems to indicate this), then we need to be seriously thinking about who we're going to call? And It probably ain't gonna be Ghostbusters! More conciseness to come...... Peace 2PhiloVoid Are you saying that the modern lesson of James for the ill is to make sure you call someone who can be of some real help--that is, a doctor? Not god, a church elder, or holy prayer warrior? Cool. We now go to science for what we used to go to god for. God is becoming more and more irrelevant. I like the way this is heading!! (lol)....that could be one way of looking at it, Jeff. But, I had in mind more along the line that today's church--in America anyway--equates more to a Laodociean deficiency, meaning that Christians overall are doing a sucky job of being Christian. Of course, it's not your fault that we Christians aren't towing God's line; it is ours. And if I'm right, the irrelevancy of the Church today, about which you speak, could be a manifestation of the way in which Christs spews out Lukewarm christians from His mouth. Sad......but maybe true. Well see. In the meantime, you probably should go to the doctor and use some science, maybe a lot of science... Well...the family is calling. I'll check in in a few days and see how it goes. Take care and have a great and relaxing weekend --all! Peace 2PhiloVoid Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FreeThinkerNZ Posted April 5, 2015 Share Posted April 5, 2015 Hi St Jeff, I'll be concise. I disagree with your proposition that James 5 is presenting anything in the way of normative ease or any kind of unconditional cast for prayer and healing. Since the context is, as you've conceded, embedded in the themes of perseverance, endurance, and faithfulness through the long haul, etc, and being that James mentions two examples of "righteous" people--anything but common at all--we see then by this overall context that it is the 'righteous' prayers of 'righteous' church leaders who may bring about healing. And when James means 'righteous,' were talking about some spiritually potent men, not Jimmy Swaggart or Benny Hinn types. Have you ever known a church leader, in our day and age, who had the endurance, faithfulness, and righteous track record of a Job or Elijah? I don't. In fact, I personally have never come across one; and I KNOW I can't say that I ever been that way myself. Wish I was; wish I had been. I wouldn't mind being so solid in faith that I'll find myself being whisked away in a Chariot of Fire, but I know that over the years, I've had some morally 'crapfest' moments. So, tough lot for me too! So, I guess I'll be going to the hospital next time I get hit with something... Peace 2PhiloVoid So, the reason prayer for healing doesn't work is that no one is righteous enough. Convenient. Isn't it, though? You may find it amusing, but I don't think sick and dying people see the humour when their hopes are dashed. Free, let me be serious and concise....don't mistake my levity while holding discussion as some kind of sick sense of depravity and insensitivity to the plight of millions around the world who are suffering profusely. I am no such sicko. Can we get past that? Because I've had my own share of suffering, as I told you some many posts back, I know what it is like to live in a constant, abysmal mental hell-hole. It's just that through those many years, I've decided that I'm not going to settle for a morose Outlook-On-Life, at least not every second of every day. If my cheap attempts at humor bug the heck out of you, then I'll make a special effort to speak to you clearly, plainly, and without joviality. Peace 2PhiloVoid It's not that you need to change the way you say things, heck I have tolerated much worse from fundy xians, lol. I have very thick skin as a result. It's just that I am pointing out, for others, why your apologetics are flawed. The practical implications of a theology that says on the one hand, pray to god and he will heal you, while on the other hand says, if it doesn't work, it's because you didn't find a person righteous enough to pray for you, are that people will get their hopes raised and then dashed. Some of the more credulous ones will have eschewed medical treatment too, risking their lives. People do this on behalf of children, too. This is why I cannot see a funny side to these beliefs. Period. It's fine for you to believe whatever you like about your god... but just be aware that those beliefs can harm others, if you aren't very careful how you express them. Beliefs can have consequences that you wouldn't want to be responsible for. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StJeffTheIncomprehensible Posted April 5, 2015 Share Posted April 5, 2015 (lol)....that could be one way of looking at it, Jeff. But, I had in mind more along the line that today's church--in America anyway--equates more to a Laodociean deficiency, meaning that Christians overall are doing a sucky job of being Christian. Of course, it's not your fault that we Christians aren't towing God's line; it is ours. And if I'm right, the irrelevancy of the Church today, about which you speak, could be a manifestation of the way in which Christs spews out Lukewarm christians from His mouth. Sad......but maybe true. Well see. In the meantime, you probably should go to the doctor and use some science, maybe a lot of science... Well...the family is calling. I'll check in in a few days and see how it goes. Take care and have a great and relaxing weekend --all! Peace 2PhiloVoid You're probably already over and out, but I'll leave this here for the next time you can play. First, thanks for the back and forth tonight. I felt like the off-the-cuff banter led you to be clearer about your position than before, and that's always good--even if I disagree with you. Second, with most of god's followers being so sucky at it, it's too bad that god made that rash promise to himself not to deluge the world again. Strange that the Ultimate Lord of the Universe would have such a grueling time at keeping his minions straight. Now would be a good time for another reboot. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sdelsolray Posted April 7, 2015 Share Posted April 7, 2015 Calvinist wannabe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
duderonomy Posted April 8, 2015 Share Posted April 8, 2015 Philo, you seem to be saying that God has left the church with no power, for no good reason, and then He blames the church for having no power. Sure sounds like the God I believed in, and back in my Christian days I did what you are doing Philo...I blamed myself for not being good enough ("of course, it's not your fault that we Christians aren't towing God's line; it is ours") It was easier at the time than admitting that it was all bovine excrement. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EyesOpened Posted April 8, 2015 Share Posted April 8, 2015 Philo, you seem to be saying that God has left the church with no power, for no good reason, and then He blames the church for having no power. Sure sounds like the God I believed in, and back in my Christian days I did what you are doing Philo...I blamed myself for not being good enough ("of course, it's not your fault that we Christians aren't towing God's line; it is ours") It was easier at the time than admitting that it was all bovine excrement. .....but D......"that's why God gave us free will". "It is up to Xtians to make the right choice and "Truely have 100% belief in God and his Mysterious ways", because if you have 0.000000000000000(you see where i am going with this number)01 % doubt then we failed as believers. Therefore God will not work his Miracles. Does that sound familiar D? This logic could go on forever because it is flawed due to lack of proof for comparison and contrast. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderator TrueFreedom Posted April 8, 2015 Moderator Share Posted April 8, 2015 Philo, you seem to be saying that God has left the church with no power, for no good reason, and then He blames the church for having no power. Sure sounds like the God I believed in, and back in my Christian days I did what you are doing Philo...I blamed myself for not being good enough ("of course, it's not your fault that we Christians aren't towing God's line; it is ours") It was easier at the time than admitting that it was all bovine excrement. .....but D......"that's why God gave us free will". "It is up to Xtians to make the right choice and "Truely have 100% belief in God and his Mysterious ways", because if you have 0.000000000000000(you see where i am going with this number)01 % doubt then we failed as believers. Therefore God will not work his Miracles. Does that sound familiar D? This logic could go on forever because it is flawed due to lack of proof for comparison and contrast. But what about faith the size of a mustard seed? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2PhiloVoid Posted April 8, 2015 Share Posted April 8, 2015 Calvinist wannabe. If you look close, you won't find a full grown T.U.L.I.P. in my garden. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2PhiloVoid Posted April 8, 2015 Share Posted April 8, 2015 Philo, you seem to be saying that God has left the church with no power, for no good reason, and then He blames the church for having no power. Sure sounds like the God I believed in, and back in my Christian days I did what you are doing Philo...I blamed myself for not being good enough ("of course, it's not your fault that we Christians aren't towing God's line; it is ours") It was easier at the time than admitting that it was all bovine excrement. Hiya Dude, As I mentioned before about when dealing with a written text, there is what we think an author has said, and what that author actually intended to say... In this case, it's my writing we're talking about, and I haven't intended to imply that God has left the church without power. In fact, as I was focusing on the verses you cited from James, I was merely attempting to explicate what James meant and not get into a full exposition as to the application his verses may or may not have for us today. But, since you're bringing us into the issue at a personal level....... Yes, as I reflect over the past quarter century of my attempt to walk the talk, I do blame myself for some of the lack of success I've experienced in my Christian life. At various times, I've been a double-minded sinner. Moreover, I made a rash vow early on in my Christian life that I neglected to fulfill. Need I say more? 2PhiloVoid Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2PhiloVoid Posted April 8, 2015 Share Posted April 8, 2015 (lol)....that could be one way of looking at it, Jeff. But, I had in mind more along the line that today's church--in America anyway--equates more to a Laodociean deficiency, meaning that Christians overall are doing a sucky job of being Christian. Of course, it's not your fault that we Christians aren't towing God's line; it is ours. And if I'm right, the irrelevancy of the Church today, about which you speak, could be a manifestation of the way in which Christs spews out Lukewarm christians from His mouth. Sad......but maybe true. Well see. In the meantime, you probably should go to the doctor and use some science, maybe a lot of science... Well...the family is calling. I'll check in in a few days and see how it goes. Take care and have a great and relaxing weekend --all! Peace 2PhiloVoid You're probably already over and out, but I'll leave this here for the next time you can play. First, thanks for the back and forth tonight. I felt like the off-the-cuff banter led you to be clearer about your position than before, and that's always good--even if I disagree with you. Second, with most of god's followers being so sucky at it, it's too bad that god made that rash promise to himself not to deluge the world again. Strange that the Ultimate Lord of the Universe would have such a grueling time at keeping his minions straight. Now would be a good time for another reboot. You're welcome for the previous course of banter. I enjoyed it, along with the black-eyes that attended the banter. You may be right about your second point, Jeff. If the Biblical record is correct, it seems God has always had a terrible time dealing with his "minions," what with their being stiff-necked and all. From what I hear, He's got another reboot in the making, even as we speak... (I'm trying to decide which is the most appropriate smiley for my comment. I'm thinking, either: or . You decide.) 2PhiloVoid Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mymistake Posted April 8, 2015 Share Posted April 8, 2015 Yes, as I reflect over the past quarter century of my attempt to walk the talk, I do blame myself for some of the lack of success I've experienced in my Christian life. At various times, I've been a double-minded sinner. Moreover, I made a rash vow early on in my Christian life that I neglected to fulfill. Need I say more? The sooner you leave Christianity the sooner you can start healing from what it has done to you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts