Matt, might this be the type of thing you are getting at?
(From the "Why Doesn't God heal Amputees" thread)
http://www.baptistboard.com/showthread.php?t=45289&page=5
reformedbeliever said:
I have chronic pain from two failed back surgeries. There was a time in my life when massive doses of opioid pain medication would not relieve the pain. It was at that point in my life that I prayed that God would take my life. He did. He caused the old man to die and a new one to be born again. My life was never the same. I still have chronic pain. Now my pain reminds me of His sovereign grace and mercy. The pain that used to be the focal point in my life, is not the focal point anymore.... Jesus is. Jesus is so big in my life that pain is only a small part of it. Although the pain is still there, it is as if Jesus has become the pain reliever... as if He takes the pain for me. I am able to bear it. He has healed me.
This type of statement, so prevelant in so many "testimonies" has always bothered me, and I have seen where it leads to what you describe. God "makes the pain not matter"; that is, if you have really "
given Him your life" as we see it defined here. So from there; it even gets into
judging, and questioning the salvation or at least "sanctification" of a person who comes to us with pain, instead of trying to comfort him (In fact; we think that "tough love" approach IS "helping him" For some, maybe, but not all. But that's how this "testimonal" approach goes. "I gave my {life, pain, anger, sorrow, lust} to Christ, and, "it no longer controls my life". Then, they'll admit that yes, you still feel whatever is ailing you, but it is "an uphill battle for the rest of your life", and by "faith and not feelings" that you believe you are healed, and then, "miraculously", God "changes" your attitude. Yet, we sensationalize it, making it
sound as if Jesus really does make you
feel better. But then, when it doesn't work like that, we say it is not about feelings. Is it any wonder so many people get
more discouraged?
This is the message of so many of our well known teachers, including the ones on TV who are often criticized for tickling the ears in various ways (Joyce Meyers, etc). It is a multi million dollar industry, in fact. Also, the basis of much of the sensationalistic clams of "healing" in charismatic circles, when they can't muster a supposed physical healing.
The logical end of this is the "process salvation" argument DT was able to sneak in at the very last moments of the "The Doctrine by Which the Church Stands or Falls 2", where this "growth" is actually the "perfection" by which we "strive for" in "the race", "perseverance", "diligently add to the faith" etc. of the various proof texts, thus "an entrance will be supplied for us into the heavenly kingdom". (My response was to be how that leaves us with no hope, except in ourselves, and it was even implied that Paul was saved yet, as he supposedly wasn't "perfected", per Phil. 3 Also it's “work
out your salvation with fear and trembling” in ch.2; not "work FOR your salvation", and
"Grace" is "unmerited FAVOR", not some utility for you to gain favor, —a set of "instructions" to earn salvation; based on a misreading of Titus 2:11-12; as the Campbellists also argued here!)
Most evangelicals do not directly go this far, but they use the same exact proof texts, and just like one of their arguments against the non-OSAS position, they can fall back on the "retro delete" theory (as Bob Ryan puts it) if necessary, where they were never saved to begin with. (But to think of it, that whole argument is silly, as who produces NO WORKS at all? This raises the question of where "the line" between saved and lost is, which DT called "legalistic" and a "minimalistic checklist", but it is precisely the works-salvation doctrine that raises that question, as we don't see ANYBODY who is actually perfect. But then, if we are saved "not without" works (HP), nobody has
zero works either).
So with even our salvation or "sanctification" (or "filling with the Spirit, etc) on the line from this teaching, naturally, many will go to fellowship with other Christians with this "happy face"; else, something must be wrong with them. Those who don't; I myself have seen, are looked down on, and their walk with God questioned. Also, as some have criticized, the music becomes shallow and airy like "shampoo jingles" (Horton,
Beyond Culture Wars).
There are numerous problems with this line of reasoning (called the "
emotional health gospel"); the OP being but one of them. It takes many of these scriptures out of context, for one. That is a long detailed discussion I go into at
http://members.aol.com/etb700/abundant.html
Basically, the Biblical situation of persecution for the faith becomes contextualized to our everyday situations, and "faith", which was the vehicle through which we trust God for
salvation, is taken and applied to something
else. —"Trusting God" now becomes a philosophy of
positive attitudes in life with some unknown "good" our pain is postulated to lead to, being what we 'trust' Him for! The person who shows his pain, is therefore not "trusting God" or "having faith", which are the conditions to salvation!
And the doctrine, also makes us look arrogant, because it turns sanctification into, basically, a self-improvement, or "character building" program, and then by callig this "supernatural, but the power of the Spirit", basically presumes only Christians can grown in character. But the "steps to victory" or "abundant life" spelled out by these teachers, is basically the same as what you can find in secular self-help, complete with Dr. Phil and others' style "no nonsense tough talk motivation". So we claim God is changing us, "as we make our daily choices" (the "steps" that are said to change us), but then, people see our imperfections, and we say "Oh, but God is not finished with me; I'm a work in progress" (and yet again; some groups here claim that this perfection is what will grant us entry into Heaven!) But the other side of the coin is that non-Christians are growing like that too, and some are further along than we are. Much of our "culture/political" rhetoric acts as if all non-Christians indulge in all sins and never grow. After all, "love, joy, peace, etc. " are "not natural". But this is not true. They might be less likely to try to improve themselves morally, if, for instance, rejecting "religious rules" they do not even think lust or violence are wrong. But when they think there is some natural benefit to it, they will try to improve themselves; such as "overcoming" drinking, smoking, being overweight (the latter two becoming somewhat of popular obsessions), etc. They may not be doing it for Christ; but they can and many do use the same positive thinking processes ("this is for a better good down the road", though this may be in this life only and not in the next), to overcome situations. Some psychologists, philosophers and motivational speakers even speak of "delayed gratification", a concept you would think Christians had a monopoly on! (This is one reason why so many non-Christians retort back to Christians "oh, you're supposed to be this way ["loving", "giving", "peaceful" etc], but people of other religions have often done better than you, so you're no better than any other human", thus having the opposite effect of the "testimony" all our suffering was supposed to produce).
We then may point out that what we have that they don't is forgiveness of sins. But this is what we should have been pointing to all along.
This is what we have by the "power of God" (the Holy Spirit) unto sanctification, and hopefully, the "peace" that comes from being out from under condemnation, and which we "believe we have" or "claim" by "faith" even though it may not look like it. All the "growth" we are to "add to faith" then is a
fruit of this, not the
cause of it. Focusing on this will eliminate a lot of the confusion and disillusionment of not only the unbelievers, but even us in the churches as well. Then, maybe, there will be more "perfection of love", rather than all this bickering, judging and oneupmanship.
