Casting out spirits and other things

Thess., I would like to answer your question but it seems I would be speaking for jesus on something he would only know. I cannot imagine that he would have given special power to cast ouit demons to a unbeliever but then again I can't imagine a talking donkey either, so from me I can only give opinion. I am willing to listen if you have some scripture to show me on the subject.

Kelly, it's nice to be sort of on the same side with you, for a change You brought up a great example of even those closest to Jesus failing to do what they should have had the power to do. Jesus was the master of taking any situation and making a teaching moment out of it.

Dan, I think what we have hear is a failure to communicate(isn't that a line from a movie?) Anyway, The gift of healing was in the people who had it. By in I mean part of them, just like a singing voice. It was something supernatural that they could do. Because "gifts" are for body edification only you will see that Peter always preached after he healed. The healing was a pre-cursor to his sharing the gospel. The point is that now we pray and God heals. Back then they healed by themselves, just as one sings or preaches today.

In Christ,
Brian

Brian, Ray,

In general it sounds like the answer from you is no. Here is the problem. When we are discussing falling from grace us Catholics will bring up that Judas was choosen by Jesus and so we will use him as an example of someone who was in grace but likely fell from grace. That he didn't have the grace of final perseverence which means that he "continued" in his salvation, though at some point if he had died he probably would have been saved and gone to heaven. Though in truth we will also say that we don't absolutely know his final outcome since God judges in the end and he may have repented of his betrayal as he hung from the rope, just before his heart took it's last beat. It's a long shot but may have happened. Though this is a side issue to the verse I want to bring up. You guys will cite the verse that says "they never were with us" to say that he was never a Christian and never was saved. Now if as Ray stated and you implied above, he was never saved, then what of the following verse.

Matthew 10:1-4
Jesus summoned HIS TWELVE disciples and gave THEM authority over unclean spirits, to cast them out, and to heal every kind of disease and every kind of sickness.
Now the names of the twelve apostles are these: The first, Simon, who is called Peter, and Andrew his brother; and James the son of Zebedee, and John his brother;
Philip and Bartholomew; Thomas and Matthew the tax collector; James the son of Alphaeus, and Thaddaeus;
Simon the Zealot, and JUDAS ISCARIOT, the one who betrayed Him.

It is quite clear in these verses that Judas did have this power and it seems to me that in order to do these things belief/faith on some level is neccessary. I see nothing that excludes him. So (especially you ray, since you were most definite) how do you reconcile your belief that Judas was "never among us" and the fact that he had power over demons in Jesus name?

Thanks.

Gerald

Bumping this up.

Hi Thess.

Good example. I have really never studied this and that is why I left the door open with my answer. I think that scripture points to the fact Judas never really "rooted" a belief and was not a real believer. IF Jesus gave Judas the power then we know that one time a non-believer had the power to cast out demons. This would have been special power given for a special purpose from Jesus himself. God gave the power of speech to a donkey, who I am guessing was also not a believer, though that is just a guess . OK, so what is the point we are heading to here. Go ahead and spit it out.

In Christian Love,
Brian

There are no active spiritual gifts given by God, to do what you ask.

Click to expand...

AAAAAAhhhh Briguy, we meet again.

Suffice it to say that my husband no longer has retinal cancer (no treatement was ever given and we have proof of the diagnosis and the follow up which shows no cancer present) because of the "healing power" of God.

Hi MM, it's been a while. Hope you have been well

Praise God that He healed your husband. I totally believe that God does heal at His will, in response to prayer. We have no disagreement there. Here is the thing though. The gift of Healing was given to a select few in the early church. Those who had it could heal whomever they wanted at any time. It was not related to God's will, per se. The person with the gift had the power, the healing was up to them. Now, because that gift is not with the "body" anymore, God chooses when and whom to heal, as we pray. I am trying to make that point clear but feel like I am not doing that great of a job. Just so you know, I am of the camp that says that the service gifts remain with the "body" to this day.

In Christ,
Brian

Originally posted by Briguy:
Hi Thess.

Good example. I have really never studied this and that is why I left the door open with my answer. I think that scripture points to the fact Judas never really "rooted" a belief and was not a real believer. IF Jesus gave Judas the power then we know that one time a non-believer had the power to cast out demons. This would have been special power given for a special purpose from Jesus himself. God gave the power of speech to a donkey, who I am guessing was also not a believer, though that is just a guess

. OK, so what is the point we are heading to here. Go ahead and spit it out.

In Christian Love,
Brian

Click to expand...

A non believer casting out spirits doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me. It is either in the name of Jesus or of the devil as I think Ray pointed out above so nicely. You may not get the drift of where I was headed but I have already made my point. Judas fell. He may have been only at the milk stage but he was at some point in his life in grace. You may not see it as a problem in your OSAS world where the doctrine stands no matter what, but it solidifies my position and puts another nail in the coffin.

Hey Thess.

No, it does not hurt my OSAS position at all. Our God used believers and non-believers throughout the Bible so God giving the power to cast out demons to Judas is no big deal at all to me. It is not a spiritual gift given to those who recieve Jesus and become a child of the living God. It was a special power like he gave the donkey. You have failed to comment on that point about the donkey twice now, which means it was a good point

In Christ,
Brian

Originally posted by Briguy:
Hey Thess.

No, it does not hurt my OSAS position at all. Our God used believers and non-believers throughout the Bible so God giving the power to cast out demons to Judas is no big deal at all to me. It is not a spiritual gift given to those who recieve Jesus and become a child of the living God. It was a special power like he gave the donkey. You have failed to comment on that point about the donkey twice now, which means it was a good point

In Christ,
Brian

Click to expand...

Certainly God can do what he wishes. Yet we are not donkeys. We have wills and intellects and God does not violate them. What God gives us we must allow in. He does not force himself on us as a rapist. Show me someone in the Bible whom God forced his gifts on. No, Judas recieved the power to cast out demons and cure the sick from Jesus by his will as well as God's.

Blessing Brian.

Hi Thess.
You wrote: ""Show me someone in the Bible whom God forced his gifts on. No, Judas recieved the power to cast out demons and cure the sick from Jesus by his will as well as God's.""


Yet you believe that an infant, totally of not his own will, can be Baptized into Grace and salvation. This would be the parents will being thrust upon the child and the child having no say. Hmmmmmmmmm

In Christ,
Brian

Originally posted by Briguy:
Hi Thess.
You wrote: ""Show me someone in the Bible whom God forced his gifts on. No, Judas recieved the power to cast out demons and cure the sick from Jesus by his will as well as God's.""


Yet you believe that an infant, totally of not his own will, can be Baptized into Grace and salvation. This would be the parents will being thrust upon the child and the child having no say. Hmmmmmmmmm

In Christ,
Brian

Click to expand...

Well if you see this as an inconsistency then you are admitting that you have one (since you didn't answer the one I presented you with) . You see in your OSAS framework it is very hard for you to understand the truth of the Catholic faith, even though I know you try Brian. You mix our theology with your to come up with a contradiction in it. If the child were forevermore saved after the baptism you would be absolutely correct. There would be a problem.
The seed falls to the ground and begins to grow. More seeds (like the child) of faith grow on the stem. Eventually these seeds of faith must separate from the stem (the faith of the parent) and grow on their own. Baptizing a child is not taking away his freedom to choose any more than God granting him physical life is taking away that choice. A child in their innocence would not deny themselves the Holy Spirit (I know you don't believe that the Holy Spirit comes at baptism but it is true (repent and be baptized... and you shall recieve the Holy Spirit), if they could comprehend him. It is the Adult who has latched on to sins that avoids God. That has been my experience. It is giving the child a fighting chance in this world where sin and error abound. The children must teach the child the faith to which God promises in proverbs that they will return when they are older. I have seen it happen many times in just that manner.

Blessings.

Thess. Hope you are well. Just to change gears some. If you really would look at children who are brought up with more fundamental type of Biblical instruction vs. children brought up Catholic, which children do you think read the Bible more, are more likely to attend a Christian college, less likely to smoke, drink, and swear. Which group would listen to Christian music more? which group would share their faith more? I ask this because here in the mid-west the answer is obvious and all of the above would weigh heavy toward the more fundamental approach to parenting and Biblical instruction. Now I am hoping you will agree with me that right or wrong the Fund. raised kids tend to be more involved with learning about God, in general, then Catholic kids. The greater point based on my conclusion would be that the infant baptism is not making the impact it should. At minimum you will have to agree that baptized Catholic children do not have less illegitamite births, and end up on drugs or alcohol less then their more fundamental raised counter-parts.

In Christ,
Brian

Thess. I am struggling a bit today so please forgive me if this sounded harsh at all.

BUMP!!!!!

Originally posted by Briguy:
Thess. Hope you are well. Just to change gears some. If you really would look at children who are brought up with more fundamental type of Biblical instruction vs. children brought up Catholic, which children do you think read the Bible more, are more likely to attend a Christian college, less likely to smoke, drink, and swear. Which group would listen to Christian music more? which group would share their faith more? I ask this because here in the mid-west the answer is obvious and all of the above would weigh heavy toward the more fundamental approach to parenting and Biblical instruction. Now I am hoping you will agree with me that right or wrong the Fund. raised kids tend to be more involved with learning about God, in general, then Catholic kids. The greater point based on my conclusion would be that the infant baptism is not making the impact it should. At minimum you will have to agree that baptized Catholic children do not have less illegitamite births, and end up on drugs or alcohol less then their more fundamental raised counter-parts.

In Christ,
Brian

Thess. I am struggling a bit today so please forgive me if this sounded harsh at all.

Click to expand...

Just have a minute brian. I will try to give this a minute tonight. In brief baptism as I have stated before doesn't mean that you are there like the dogma of OSAS. It means that God comes to dwell in you. OUr doctrine of infant baptism also has a clause in it that says the parents agree to raise the child in the faith. I believe I dealt with that earlier. Those children raised in the faith are more likely not to have illeg. births, divorce, do drugs, etc. etc.. Those Catholics who attend Mass every sunday have a 1 in 100 chance of their marriage failing for instance. They have a 1/1000 chance if they attend mass every sunday and pray daily as a family. If you don't practice your faith it is of little value.

I will comment on Bible reading later.

Hope your having a better day.

Blessings


More later.

Hi Thess.
Thanks for caring

The point I was trying to make is that if God comes to an infant/child in Baptism it should have an impact on the life of that child regardless of how the parent is raising that child. Now, I know it is very important how the child is raised and I agree that kids who go to church regular, whose families pray together often, eat meals together, do family activities together, etc... will be more moral (encombassing the issues discussed above) in general then children not getting those things. So the point is that baptized or not it is the "training" of the child that is important and has the impact, not the baptism. The Bible says in proverbs this very thing, I don't have to tell you the verse as everyone knows it. That verse does not mention circumssion as the first step. It just says train and we know that "training" works. Hope that makes sense. I never meant to downplay a good Catholic upbringing, I just wanted to show that you believe that God dwells in a child because of Baptism and that dwelling seems to make no difference in how the child turns out.

Take care, I appreciate your great attitude and the way you have passion for what you believe. I have learned a lot from you and a few other Catholics on this board. I can even see the error in a lot of what non-Catholics post on this board about Catholic belief now. I still have some core differences with you but feel we are both are seeking after a Christ-like life.

In Jesus,
Brian

"I just wanted to show that you believe that God dwells in a child because of Baptism and that dwelling seems to make no difference in how the child turns out."


I would suggest that this is a very difficult statement to make from the Catholic perspective. Baptism is not the end but the beginning. Seems to me it is like the child nursed by it's mother vs. the child that isn't physically. Further life is a journey and as catholics we believe that sanctification and justifciation are a process. Further we believe that the greater the sanctification, the greater the reward in heaven. Thus the earlier it starts the better. It starts with baptism.

Do you suggest that Bible reading daily is neccessary for salvation (not that I am knocking it as it is in my daily devotion). An educated society is a recent phenomena. I doudt you are saying that, yet you seem to ascribe an importance to it while remaining in the OSAS camp. What if you were to stop reading the Bible tommorrow. Would you be saved?

I don't have alot of time for this lately as the new job has gotten pretty busy. I wish you well and will check in when I can. Blessings.

Hi Thess. Hope the new jod calms down a bit for you and you get more relax time. We can all use more time to spend with family, friends, and our computers of course

You wrote: Do you suggest that Bible reading daily is neccessary for salvation (not that I am knocking it as it is in my daily devotion). An educated society is a recent phenomena. I doudt you are saying that, yet you seem to ascribe an importance to it while remaining in the OSAS camp. What if you were to stop reading the Bible tommorrow. Would you be saved?

Yes, I guess I could stop reading the Bible tomorrow and I would be saved. It is hard to imagine a scenario where as I would stop reading the Bible, as during the tough times I look to it for comfort and during better times I read to learn more. The point about children reading the Bible is so that they can come to personal faith in Jesus. The more they read God's word the more likely they will understand what Jesus did for them and will want to place their trust in him. Certaily Bible reading is not part of salvation but in the big picture it is one of the things that can lead TO salvation and certainly once the person is saved ("saved" as in the term from early Acts), leads to growth and maturity. So again, what I am saying is that a child that is baptized, with no instruction to follow (believe me this happens a lot) is no better off then an unbaptized child with no "Training" in the Lord. Also, A Baptized child with training is no better off then an unbaptized child with training. As I said, those raised in a fundemental type of home have a bigger chance of going to Christian college, etc... then those raised in mainstream belief sysyems that promote infant baptism. Again I say, Why doesn't God bestowing his Grace (dwelling with the child, or starting the journey as you said) have an impact on the life of the child? Can you except that my premise is fair and is what we see in this world?

In Christian love,
Brian