Re: prayer and healing

I can echo what Jack says. In our EPC church we elders have anointed folks a
number of times, with varying results, including some remarkable healings (and
we have had some remarkable healings when we simply prayed for an individual).
As Jack says, we always felt we had done the right thing regardless of the
outcome.

--- Jack Haas <haas.john@comcast.net> wrote:

> Greetings:
>
> The elders of our (Presbyterian) church have often laid on hands....
> according to the Biblical Injunction. In some cases people have seen
> remarkable improvement in their health. Others have had told us that
> they have been encouraged in their battles. Others showed no
> discernible change. We always felt that we had done the right thing
> regardless of the outcome.
> Jack Haas
>
>
>
> Mervin Bitikofer wrote:
> > Just out of curiosity: how many of you have ever gone to the elders
> > of your church when you were sick and had them lay hands on you, etc.
> > as instructed? As a last resort? as a first resort? ever at
> > all? I'm not trying to be a stick-in-the-mud as far as Biblical
> > literalism goes -- I am a Christian who really wants to know God's
> > will and I try to (do) take the entire Bible seriously as God's
> > word. I'm just wondering how many of us put our money (or health)
> > where our mouth is. Not that anything in the Bible prohibits us from
> > using other medical recourse as we can, but meanwhile this exortation
> > is still there.
> >
> > As C.S. Lewis once noted, Jesus' promise as given in Mark 11 (after
> > withered fig tree) is that whatever we ask for in prayer, if we
> > believe it, it will be done for us. No caveat that it must be within
> > God's will. No conditional that is has to be something 'good'. Just
> > believe, and it will be done. Lewis concludes that new believers
> > should certainly not be tantalized with passages like this before some
> > maturity of immersion in the wider body of scripture. But how do you
> > literalists deal with passages like this? Or at the end of Mark
> > (I've been reading Mark lately) -- the signs that WILL accompany those
> > who believe: they will handle snakes and drink deadly poison
> > without harm. How many sermons have you heard preached on that
> > passage? I view all scripture as authoritative from God, but I can
> > sure understand the eye-rolling delight agnostics get from passages
> > like this and from us in our "bend-over-backward" antics to explain
> > why certain passages "don't apply." Probably, I'll get a half dozen
> > well polished reasons from some of you about why snake-handling, etc.
> > can be dismissed as a cultural difference or some other thing. And I
> > can guarantee you that all such explanations (some of which may be
> > entirely correct IMO) will still elicit only condescending smiles from
> > hostile challengers who will only see the "convenience" of our
> > dismissal. Out of a two thousand year history of Christianity, has a
> > mountain every been thrown into the sea? Maybe nobody in Christendom
> > has ever been able to "believe" enough. Yes, I know, it's only
> > metaphorical mountains that are cast aside, we tell ourselves.
> > "How convenient!" my athiest friend would respond. (He's a
> > literalist like some of you apparently are, and extremely stubborn
> > about it.) So how do we answer people in this mode of thought?
> >
> > --merv
> >
> >
> > Dick Fischer wrote:
> >
> >> It's too bad they didn't have a fourth group where they actually did
> >> what the Bible says to do: /"Is any sick among you? let him call for
> >> the elders of the church; and let them pray over him, anointing him
> >> with oil in the name of the Lord"/ (Jas 5:14).
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Dick Fischer
> >>
> >> Dick Fischer, Genesis Proclaimed Association
> >>
> >> Finding Harmony in Bible, Science, and History
> >>
> >> www.genesisproclaimed.org <http://www.genesisproclaimed.org/>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> If the increase in complicaions in the third group is real, perhaps
> >> it will
> >>
> >> be cited as scientific confirmation of the command to pray in secret
> >> (Matt.
> >>
> >> 6:6).
> >>
> >> __
> >>
> >> Louise M. Freeman, PhD
> >>
> >> Psychology Dept
> >>
> >> Mary Baldwin College
> >>
> >> Staunton, VA 24401
> >>
> >> 540-887-7326
> >>
> >> FAX 540-887-7121
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >>
> >> From: "jack syme" <drsyme@cablespeed.com>
> >>
> >> To: <asa@calvin.edu>
> >>
> >> Date: Fri, 31 Mar 2006 15:06:50 -0500
> >>
> >> Subject: prayer and healing
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>> There are some interesting findings in a large study on the effects of
> >>
> >>> distant prayer on healing in today's "American Heart Journal":
> >>
> >>>
> >>
> >>> 1800 patients were randomized into three groups. One group was told
> >>
> >>> they
> >>
> >>> "might" be the object of distant prayer, and they were. Another group
> >>
> >>> was
> >>
> >>> told the same thing, but they were not. And the third group was
> >>
> >>> promised it
> >>
> >>> would receive prayer and did.
> >>
> >>>
> >>
> >>> The findings were interesting. Not only did distant prayer not help,
> >>
> >>> but
> >>
> >>> being told they were being prayed for seemed to increased
> >>
> >>> complications, the
> >>
> >>> most common complication being atrial fibrillation.
> >>
> >>>
> >>
> >>> The first two groups had the same complication rates, about 50%. The
> >>
> >>> third
> >>
> >>> group had a complication rate of 59%. The authors were not sure this
> >>
> >>> increased complication rate is real, and did little speculation on the
> >>
> >>> cause.
> >>
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
>

Bill Hamilton
William E. Hamilton, Jr., Ph.D.
248.652.4148 (home) 248.303.8651 (mobile)
"...If God is for us, who is against us?" Rom 8:31

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
Received on Sat Apr 1 20:01:16 2006