The Lakeland Revival-Do We Think All these Folks Are Crazy?

Henry,

Night Line asked Todd to send proof of his healings along with Date line and he never did. I read that Todd believes in astral projection and that is not in the bible. He also believes in talking to the dead, which in scripture is forbidden, Todd justifies this by saying " well as long as your not consumed by it"

He to me is like those mentioned in the bible that will come in Christ's name, they will bring some truth mixed in with lies and deception.

 

Are we back onto the Revival? Have we left whether Jesus acted in His own name or not? Hard to follow where Hank intended to go with this thread.

Hank, I believe part of your confusion is in mixing the Old Testament (OT) and New Testament (NT) ideologies. In Matthew 5:17 Jesus said, "Think not that I have come to abolish the law and the prophets; I have come not to abolish them but to fulfill them."

Jesus fulfilled the OT law.

And to say that it's up to us to prove you wrong when you have not proven yourself right is nothing more than cop-out, really--it's how a person who cannot answer responds. And yes, we may all count on someone challenging us if we make an assertion about religion that we don't adequately cite.

To simply repeat a verse out-of-context doesn't refute the fact that John 1:14 tells us that The Word was made flesh and dwelt among us.

We might all be able to do a better job explaining if we could tell where you were wanting to go with this thread.

It's unclear whether you're attacking the Revival, Todd Bentley, Jesus, The Holy Trinity, or the people who have responded to you. You're all over the place, man.

Just a friendly heads-up.

Edit:

See what? A night of the Revival? Tell us what you want us to see, Hank!

In Matthew 7 15-17 Jesus said, "Beware of false prophets, what come to you in sheep's clothing but inwardly are ravenous wolves. You will know them by their fruits. Are grapes gathered from thorns, or figs from thistles? So, every sound tree bears good fruit, but the bad tree bears evil fruit."

Jesus tells us to wait until the harvest to evaluate whether fruit is good or evil. We should wait and see.

In speaking of glossolalia, St. Paul said in I Corinthians 14:33, "For God is not a God of confusion but of peace."

Because of that reminder, I tend to distrust flamboyant preachers and believe Paul's gift was from God. And for the record, true glossolalia will elevate one to God, even just hearing it.

Or was that not your question?

 

Hank,

I would just encourage you to look at those who refute Todd, they are on the net and give bible vs to help you see. Read those vs and see if Bentley is off base.

 

Hi Med
don't know what Henry is doing, but I know I am revolted by Bentley (see my very intellectual reference about kicking his fat a_ _)--as far as the Revival, I don't know--I can analyze it from a social scientist's perspective, but choose not to--from a theological perspective, I don't know what to think (again referenced in a different post above where I tell a story about Oral Roberts)--trying to keep an open mind and not all pastors' comments I have read about this event have been negative--so who knows?

don't know where the holy trinity comes in to this, but last time I had a talk about that with a friend who is a pastor, she said that is a puzzling thing even among seasoned theologians

nice to see you again
(PS--when you get a chance, PM me about the family in TX who suffered the loss)

 

Oops. This might not be the best night to invite people to watch the Lakeland revival.

Todd's begging for money.

And he has the whole bunch praying to God for prosperity and financial freedom.

No, I don't have a scripture to back it up, but I don't think God likes that sort of thing.

 

Hello! Back from a month trying to stay as far away from the intarwebs as I could! ;D

I certainly don't know, that's for sure! I have a Baptist-pastor Doctor of Divinity cousin whose church has a television ministry and we affectionately call him 'the televangelist'. He doesn't heal on camera or televise his altar calls, just preaches. I'm rather sensitive to criticism of television ministries but to me the Revival doesn't fall under that category.

It is. On a side trip, Hank seemed to me to be unsure of whether Jesus healed only after His baptism and only through the action of the Holy Spirit. Hank didn't seem to me to make it contentious but it is a point of contention between some Protestant denominations and the Catholic Church. My mother is Methodist and doesn't believe that Jesus was an aspect of God. The Catholic Church looks at several places in the Gospels but leans on the first chapter of the Gospel of John to teach that Jesus was the Second Person of the Trinity, fully God and fully man; therefore, His actions were done of His own accord and not dependent on any actions of the other Two Aspects of God, healing actions included.

Thanks. PM coming up...

 

good golly, a modern day Pharisee is he!

 

Yes, everything is always much more simple than we imagine. Thanks for pointing that out for me. I will take that pearl to heart, post it on my wall. I need to keep reminding myself of that one. Simple, yes it is all very simple. I suppose we should expect that those who are the smartest then must be the most simple minded.

 

Regarding Occam's comment, notice that while he does say that the simpler theory may be the most preferred, he does not say that it is the most correct. And because he is speaking of theories, implied is that he is using a scientic method, during the process of which the decision maker would have already performed a diligent search for data and a diligent analysis to explain the data. Once that diligence has been done, and once all theoretical analysis is exhausted, then he says he preferrs the simpler of two competing theories that explain the data. I believe that his philosophy is a reasonable one. But to try and apply his philosophy prior to performing the required diligence, to infer that presented two options to explain a phenomenon he would always choose the simpler of the two, and perform no more diligence than that, I believe, misses his point completely.

What I do not see in many of the comments so far is an exhaustive analysis of the theories that can potentially explain how these folks, day after day, week after week, come away believing that they are healed, yet are not, as you and many of the folks who have posted here contend.

I am in Lakeland as I write. Yesterday we attended a meeting during which an Iraqi war veteran, C. Johnson, had his war wounds healed. In 2005 in Iraq, he was hit by shrapnel from behind. According to Mr. Johnson, his 'ulna nerve' was severed at the elbow. Since then he has had no feeling in his lower three fingers and has been in constant pain. During rehab, he was fitted with an implant device in his body near his right kidney. This device is designed to help him control his arm. He could not touch or hit his elbow, for if he did, he would experience horrific pain. He has been in this condition since 2005. He walked into the meeting in that condition. During the meeting, as healing was demonstrated, yes demonstrated, what he described as 'fire' went through his body, after which his pain was gone and feeling was starting to tingle in his lower three left fingers.

Last night at the meeting, I saw him up on the first row onthe side of the stage. He was dancing with the music. I chose to go to speak to him. I told him that I had seen him at the meeting earlier that day and I asked him about his experience . He showed me the scars from his elbow and the incision in his lower back where the implant was installed. He said that he has no more pain and that although there was still some tingling, when I met him in the meeting the feeling in his fingers had almost returned completely. Needless to say, he was an extremely happy individual.

But to listen to some folks here, they contend that this Iraqi war veteran is merely extremely gullible. Or perhaps they think that they would be gullible to believe what I write here. I do not know which of those competing preconceptions is the simpler; so I do not know which of these the various folks here might prefer as they try to aply Occam's rule. Both ideas seem equally complex to me. But if you think about it, there is a third competing idea. And of the three, it is in fact the most simple of all the others. That idea is that this fellow did indeed receive healing. And that is a large portion of my point here. No one here, seeing what they have seen on web, reading what they have read, has experienced first hand what I'm talking about. They have only preconceptions that presently guide their opinions, not bonified theories as Occams's rule requires. For this reason, not only does Occam's philosophy not apply, but no one here, according to Occam is even a qualified decision-maker. With respect to what I refer to in Lakeland, no one here has done the required diligence to merely use the simpler of two theories rule.

 

Lee,

I'll tell you what surprises me about your take on all this. You see, this is all about healing, perhaps unorthodox healing relative to many expectations, but healing nonetheless. You yourself are a purveyor of unorthodox healing ideas. And I know how hard you have worked to try to get your ideas accepted. I know the slung arrows you have suffered. And you have done all this with wonderful intentions. You just want to help people deal with their illnesses. And I will bet that even some of the folks you presently gang together with on this thread were and are your own idea's detractors.

I expect that you feel like until folks have tried what you have offered that they are not qualified to judge your methods. That would be reasonable of you. But here we have another method of healing, non-invasive just like you like, and one that for all reports and apearances has yielded phenomenal results. Yet here, with no more knowledge or experience than you have other than what you have gained sitting at your computer, you, Lee Mickle, the author of DBL, cast stones at this potential method of non-invasive healing. Like I said, that just surprises me.

 

Hello All,

First, I'd like to tell everyone that I have been to Lakeland. I have a solid background in Christianity and have read and studied the bible under men and woman with years of experience.

I'm noticing a few things on this thread that are worth pointing out. The discussion participants are composed of new Christians (Hank), mature Christians, meaning those who have had many years of having the Holy Spirit's guidance and immersion in the Word (Charisse), seekers (those open to what we Christians consider the "truth", people who believe that each person has his or her own "truth", and others (Christians and non-Christians).

When a discussion of this nature takes place with the above mentioned, it will provide much information and opinion but there will never be a resolution. That's OK as long as everyone remains civil (Ray's rule for our board). Please also keep in mind that Ray created this "Room" as a place to support one another spiritually, not debate. There are other religion forums on the Internet for debating. Learning and sharing are fine as long as it remains "supportive."

I ask that each person participating in this thread examine your motive for doing so. Please, do this for the sake of harmony on this site.

Now for my opinion on Lakeland (in case anyone cares). When I was there I experienced some powerful corporate worship. I did feel the presence of God but I think it had nothing to do with Todd. I think it was a result of many spiritually hungry people coming together and worshiping the Creator of the Universe. If people were healed, God healed them. From my perspective it is that simple. I think the same thing could have happened (or not) at my house on a Friday night (if God so desired). I do believe God wants His children to praise and worship Him, alone, and I do believe that there are miracles in these days. I also believe that there are MANY false prophets and con artists out there trying to make a buck off desperate people. I also believe that there are Christians who are convinced that they are hearing from God when they are not. It doesn't make them con artists, only poor misguided souls.

FOR CHRISTIANS: The bible says test all teachings. The way Christians test teaching is to rely on the Holy Spirit to guide us in decernment as to the teaching. Is it based in the Word of God? Is the Spirit leading us to accept or reject?

I have come to the conclusion that I will not go back to Lakeland. My focus needs to be getting back into the Word and establishing fellowship with other believers here in my hometown. I am still praying for complete healing and trusting in the Lord to give me His peace and strength to deal with anything this world hands me.

I wish everyone happiness, peace, and love,

Kim

 

Thanks very much, Kim. I think I have done about all that I can do to try to bring this possibility into the minds of those who might read this. And I think that your comments are fit ones on which to step away.

Again, thank you for your wise words.

And may God bless you, and everyone else.

Hank

 

Clapping my hands for Kim, could not have been said better, thank you,

 

No I'm not Hank. All the things that I found worked so well were orthodox (as Intrepid explained) and require personal effort.

Gang up? I'm surprised you think that. Perhaps you think I have rubbished the Lakelands Revival, but I have actually barely mentioned it. In fact the only time I directly referred to it was to say:
"There is one interesting thing about the Revival. It's about energy and focus (intention). Compare someone who comes from a Doctor's surgery with news that their condition is chronic and degenerative. The patient receives no hope or positive energy. They don't believe they can heal so they generally don't. Then consider the Revival. Every believer there was at least OPEN to healing. A good thing. And there to encourage them was someone literally spreading a positive energy telling them how much was possible. Intention and hope directed at them. That would feel wonderful for people who are in pain and losing hope. But what happens when the lights of the big show dims and the pain returns? Were the people taught how to help themselves or do they have to wait till Todd, or someone else, returns?

I tried to look at the positives and the negatives. That is actually progress as before I would have just scoffed at charismatic healing revivals. See Henry, you encouraged me to think deeper. But I came out the other side with an even stronger conviction that real healing happens when an individual takes responsibility for their own healing. Not fronting up to someone wanting to be miraculously fixed. And if people feel better after the revivals then that is great ... but it's how they feel weeks after that I am really interested in and I would want to see the results (you can see when someone no longer limps etc).

And finally about my point about finding 'God' through the most simple means ... This is not (in my view) an academic pursuit. The winner is not the person who reads the most or is the most clever or looks at it from the most angles. It is simply the person who opens up to the amazing potential. From the heart and soul. And I believe each new born is absolutely perfect in God's own blueprint. No sin there and no scriptures. These are my beliefs and you have yours. Every person here has a unique take on it. And I may disagree with something you say here and agree with something you say in another thread as I do with everyone. Isn't that natural? I don't believe I have ever had a gang mentality - usually quite the opposite.

An interesting thread Henry.

Lee.

 

Kim,

While I appreciate your efforts to be the peacemaker (you take the beatitudes to heart) in this diverse group, the Spiritual Den is likely to engender contentious discussion. I agree we should try to do it respectfully, but I know we don't always do that.

Henry,

I wrote a paper on Occam's Razor in grad school and actually completely agree with your first sentence about it. Prior to that I had been exposed (as undergrad psych major) to Morgan's Canon which is often called, like Occam's, the law of parsimony, but as your further comments suggest, it is always not that simple. I will say nothing beyond that since it has been 30 years since I studied the concepts.

I do want to comment on the reference you make to the Iraqi war vet. I won't call it a cheap shot because I don't really believe (and I hope) you didn't intend to be that manipulative. I shall explain. Basically, I think the vast majority of people in this country and certainly on this board have the highest respect for Iraqi veterans and they are in effect sacrosanct. So who would insult this man's integrity? (In fact, I don't see a lot of bashing of the others who are up there in pain, desperate to be healed).

I also feel the need to digress long enough to explain why the vet is sacrosanct. As a country, we learned something very significant from the Vietnam war--hate the war, NOT the warrior. Despite the fact that over two thirds of the country disapproves of the war, only a very small minority attack the vet himself. I was not thanked for my service in Vietnam until 33 years after I returned. We didn't have PSAs on TV showing people clapping for the vets as they arrived at airports. I don't resent this and I didn't expect thanks. I tell the story for its sociological value and to return to my point--we aren't likely to denigrate this person's character.

More significantly, and back to the point, there is a difference between being gullible an being suggestible. I was involved in hypnosis in the 70s and early 80s, both in the professional psychological community and also when I had the opportunity to spend the evening with the Amazing Kreskin. After dinner with him, I watched his truly amazing performance, in which he had people feeling sensations of extreme cold or heat despite the steady ambient temperature, he had people believing people sitting beside them were hitting them--he even had a guy reach in his pocket to get his wallet and Kreskin waved his hand in front of his face and said "you can't get your hand out of your pocket"--the young man struggled and struggled but his hand was stuck. Kreskin doesn't even believe in hypnosis, but he believes in the power of suggestion, even to the extent of what appears to be mind over matter.

My point is that for many phenomena that occur, there are explanations that don't require appealing to the miraculous. I was in a hotel room with my family about 15 years ago. I had injured my back and was in such pain I could hardly hobble around--my wife and kids were doing nothing while I prepared everything for departure--I accidentally dropped a glass and became infuriated--when my anger replaced my self pity and attention to my pain, my back stopped hurting. Mind over matter is a simple way to explain it--our bodies are not disconnected from our minds and significant physiologcal changes can occur based on psychological states.

So is the vet gullible (and please show me where someone says he is)? heck if I know. Is he likely suggestible? Yes. Is there something about a large crowd and a frenzy of activity that affects the psychological state of the individual? Yes? Does the psychological state of the individual have the potential to affect his/her physiological state? Yes, definitely. See if you can find the Iraqi vet in a month and get an honest appraisal of how he feels. (not a rhetorical question--I really would like to know)

I resisted the urge to try to explain these things from the point of view of a social scientist because I would like to have an open mind and don't want to detract from anything of a spiritual nature that may be occurring. I have said many times now there are things that can't be explained. My contempt for Bentley is obvious, but I can't recall calling the people there sheep--as far as I am concerned, he is no shepherd.

 

sometimes it is Sophie's choice.

 

Jim,

Thanks for the well-reasoned comments. And I appreciate your kindness and reverence for our vets. On that, you and I are in complete agreement. Standing on that common ground, please allow me to suggest that this man is not a sheep. This man is a warrior, a leader of men. This man knows much better than most the value of life. This man also knows his body. He knows pain. He knows disability. He knows numbness. He knows paralysis. And has known these conditions for three years now. [Sidenote: Please, you must believe by now that I do not post these threads that I do for any reasons other than to help folks find healing. I may engage folks in round about ways, ways that are not necessarily apparent; still the motivation is the same, to help folks find healing. That's it. If I had any other motivations, then the fire would have left long before I hit 55,000 readers on the database thread. No one would be able to keep interest and fire in something like, especially with all the detractors I've had, that unless it was from the heart. I mean, there is no one here giving me applause for this. I do not get paid. I do not know you or anyone here by face. We don't hang together. And as many times as I have engaged others and been engaged, and by the character of those engagements, some with you, you also know that I am neither gullible, nor inordinanatly subject to the power of suggestion. If I were, I would be subject to the powers of all the suggestions that have come my way, not only on this thread, but all the others in which I have taken part.] With the side note over, you can also believe me when I tell you that this Iraqi war vet was healed. And that is my point entirely. There is healing for some folks who will entertain the idea of learning something new, branching out, forgetting preconceptions. And why should anyone do this? The same reason they should fully investigate all non-invasive healing ideas; it might work.

But beyond healing, in this case there is a much deeper meaning. That meaning goes to the very heart of the universe. I understand that and on that we can all disagree. But just like healing, unless we are willing to entertain the validity of things we do not presently understand or agree with, we cannot learn. That goes for you, me, anyone. I told Sarita earlier in this thread, I am willing to learn from anyone. At the same time, you also know that when I engage learning, comes with that many tough questions. So if I am going to learn from someone, they will have to answer tough questions. Once those questions are answered, I have learned from someone else and changed my original understanding. I enjoy that process. But when folks disengage before the questions are answered, then I am left to my original understanding of things. You've been there. You know my nature. You've engaged me on this; so you know that what I'm telling you is the truth. Knowing that, do you for one second think that I am any different away from the keyboard? Do you believe that away from this environment I am a completely different person, one who takes the suggestions of others as truth and acts on that new truth until another suggestion comes my way? Having dealt with me on the level you have, you cannot possibly believe that is true. So when I tell you something that I have learned, when I tell you about newfound knowledge on my part, you can believe that the tough questions have been asked and answered. I may not be correct. Still what I tell you has passed an extemely high bar of scrutiny. You know me, know my nature. You therefore know that what I tell you here is absolutely true.

Again, thank you for giving such a thoughtful response. Although you and I do not agree on certain things, I can appreciate the respectful way in which you just disagreed.

Thank you and I wish for you and your family to have a great day.

Hank

 

Respecting the mainstream view of healing and health on this website, yours, mine, they are both unorthodox. There is no medical doctor involved. Medicine is the orthodoxy; all other is not. That was my meaning. I'm sorry for not expounding on that point more.

Regarding the idea of ganging up, again, as I told Jim, whereas there may be other aspects to this, this is about healing. This is just another alternative method of healing, non-invasive, completely safe, healing. That is why I was surprised, no other reason.

 

Charisse,

I'm groping here. Please tell me something that Bentley has said that does not have a scriptural basis. What you read about astral projection, whateve that is, is just not true.

 

Hank,

Please search the net for yourself. There are so many things on different sites I've read that I do not have the energy to go back and sift through them again. There are quotes by Todd and then you will find other christian leaders that comment through scripture where he is wrong. There were some on the site I gave you before.

Like I said, why has the christian community turned against Todd? I believe Todd wants to do good but i know he is misguided.